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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing 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 the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), 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 to provide reflections on their evaluations and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked 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 when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, 프라그마틱 플레이 and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 (Www.google.com.Om) as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.