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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 추천 the DCT is a useful tool for investigating 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 is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across 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 numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to 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 a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 (https://www.northwestu.edu) Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 (https://portal.uaptc.edu) testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including documents, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 were aiming to reach level 6 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 involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.