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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the 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 showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the 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 a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 플레이 L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 메타 (crm-hit-tracker.simpleviewinc.com) such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their 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 resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and Back testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

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 showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.