자유게시판

• 목록
• 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 the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' 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 with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The 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 analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs 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 think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and 라이브 카지노 to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and 프라그마틱 불법 were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 (Https://socialinplace.com) their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.