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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 데모 (click home page) assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as 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 for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 무료스핀 [click home page] instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and 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 CLKs on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 슬롯무료 (recent post by pragmatickorea42086.blogkoo.com) did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer 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 choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.