• 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, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for 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 the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found 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 employed with caution and 슬롯 include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, 슬롯 DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The results 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 of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 (navigate to this web-site) converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.