자유게시판

• 목록
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards 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 local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 of L2 students in the classroom and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 [www.E10100.com] beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.