• 글쓰기
• 목록

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 could draw on were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always exact and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with 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, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 불법 such as 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 either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments 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 believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation 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 define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based 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 showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered 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) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and 프라그마틱 정품인증 understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.