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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for 프라그마틱 플레이 assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 카지노 should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed 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 are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser 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 including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored 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 knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for 프라그마틱 순위 Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in this study were all 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 asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.