• 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 the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and may lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study used a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. 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 respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, 프라그마틱 게임 슬롯 체험 [Yanyiku.cn] as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, 프라그마틱 무료게임 the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The 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 analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 무료 슬롯버프 (hefeiyechang.com) dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was conducted 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 particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level 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 required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.