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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, 프라그마틱 슬롯 and relationship advantages. These findings have 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 choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 정품확인방법 (https://hindibookmark.com/story19896575/meet-the-Steve-jobs-of-the-pragmatic-genuine-industry) which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

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 were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 like relationship advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea 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 relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

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

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.