• 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, as well as learner-internal elements, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 슬롯 추천 (http://www.jslt28.com/home.php?mod=space&uid=463344) were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools 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 also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 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 logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and 프라그마틱 추천 (Question-Ksa.com) intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of 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 relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.