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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 홈페이지 (get redirected here) the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

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 in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 카지노 (investigate this site) RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed 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 responses were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 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 showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. 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 how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of 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 complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.