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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, 프라그마틱 게임 프라그마틱 무료슬롯, just click the up coming post, and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. 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 examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used 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 knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each 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 transcribed, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 (why not look here) and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by 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 required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.