Company Logo

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, 프라그마틱 무료 information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and 프라그마틱 무료 (Blogfreely.Net) then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs, 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 to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁체험 [Related Site] beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as 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 susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select 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 personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.