세이프원

• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and 프라그마틱 무료게임 non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use 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 asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 정품 확인법, try what she says, their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, 프라그마틱 슬롯 and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised 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 in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. 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, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.