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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and 프라그마틱 데모 추천 (Lzdsxxb.Com) the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic 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 popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be 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 related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, 프라그마틱 플레이 (www.neworleansbbs.com) and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 슬롯 체험 - Socialbookmark.Stream - their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on 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 showed that 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 exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.