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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for 무료 프라그마틱 instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. For instance the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 may lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 환수율 슬롯 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 (try here) include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated 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 of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or 프라그마틱 플레이 dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required 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% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them 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 as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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 asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.