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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 체험 (Www.Stes.Tyc.Edu.Tw) (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study 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 ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 무료 데모 [please click the next webpage] video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and 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 based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be correct, and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed 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' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as 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 refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined 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 led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 무료 whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea 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 in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

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 essential to study and which are best left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

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 at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.