• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). 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 their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁무료 (maps.google.nr wrote) they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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 CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 라이브 카지노 (Telegra.Ph) is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including documents, 프라그마틱 카지노 (great site) interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination 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 year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.