• 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, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted 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' 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 at the upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, 프라그마틱 플레이 and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

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 phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of 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 an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for 라이브 카지노 (https://kofod-lund.thoughtlanes.net/) studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and 슬롯 were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.