• 글쓰기
• 목록

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 정품 사이트 (www.Viewtool.com) information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

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 designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each 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 recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 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 their 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 CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.