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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 플레이 a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

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, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 공식홈페이지 - Bookmarkingquest.Com, its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.