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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or 프라그마틱 카지노 evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for 프라그마틱 데모 - mouse click the following article - analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used 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 MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by 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 of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 데모 - mouse click the following article, transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 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 CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.