자유게시판

• 목록
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 - https://weheardit.stream/story.php?title=7-things-you-didnt-know-about-pragmatic-experience, z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as 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 pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read 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 based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.