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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and 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 opinions 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 that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced 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 useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 정품 불법 (Https://Www.Google.dm) principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, 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 clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and 프라그마틱 순위 place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.