• 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. For instance the RIs from TS and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or 무료 프라그마틱 홈페이지 (bookmarksfocus.com`s statement on its official blog) assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and 프라그마틱 사이트 (have a peek at this website) MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 슬롯 L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. 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 risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.