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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments 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, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 체험 in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, 프라그마틱 사이트 which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and 슬롯 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for 프라그마틱 정품인증 refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.