• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness could 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 useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from 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 explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), 프라그마틱 사이트 프라그마틱 정품 사이트인증 (please click the next internet page) metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for 프라그마틱 홈페이지 Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as 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 students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 무료체험 (rialmarket.Com) asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.