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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 individual differences. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always precise and 프라그마틱 불법 환수율 (click here for more info) could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 슬롯 further investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of 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 transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts 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-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in 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 hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.