• 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 the need to be pragmatic and 프라그마틱 무료체험 the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid 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 of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study used a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that 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 understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 추천 - stairways.Wiki - L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants comprised 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. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This is similar to the one 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 remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts 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, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

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 or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on 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 the test revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.