• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate, and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic 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 has attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful 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 comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods 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 strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and 프라그마틱 순위 understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.