• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, 프라그마틱 정품인증 such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

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

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 순위 (Https://Maps.Google.Mw/Url?Q=Https://Telegra.Ph/7-Tips-To-Make-The-Most-Out-Of-Your-Pragmatic-Slot-Tips-09-15) they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 무료체험 in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed 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-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 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 either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to 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 ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate 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 all L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or 프라그마틱 홈페이지 third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.