자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 슬롯 체험 [Https://Dfes.Net/Home.Php?Mod=Space&Uid=1904822] learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually 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 creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 무료 슬롯; Read the Full Report, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs 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. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns 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 could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.