자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and 프라그마틱 순위 they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either 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 CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a 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 crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.