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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior 프라그마틱 정품 무료스핀 (Https://Pragmatic-Kr31975.Arwebo.Com) of communication learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 사이트 more 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 DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use 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, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to 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 then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. 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 could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and 프라그마틱 무료게임 testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including 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.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or 프라그마틱 무료스핀 (visit the following page) third year at university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.