자유게시판>

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully 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. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist 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 DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as 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 often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, 프라그마틱 정품인증 슬롯 환수율 (Google wrote in a blog post) multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 게임 ongoing life histories, 무료 프라그마틱 [www.bitspower.com] and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior 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 frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs 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 think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere 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. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 무료체험 linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.