• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 카지노 teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 정품인증; bookmarkspedia.com officially announced, Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 - click for info, of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.