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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or 프라그마틱 카지노 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 무료프라그마틱 체험; secret info, evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating 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 can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found 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 knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.