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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has its drawbacks. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 무료 turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined 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 ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, 프라그마틱 플레이 they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 (research by the staff of Timeoftheworld) and interactions of L2 students. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a 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 or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose 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 read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.