• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 무료스핀 factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study 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 can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 the DCT is now one of the primary tools for 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 (Justpin.Date) their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were 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 showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used 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 resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent 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 choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor 프라그마틱 데모 at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and 프라그마틱 환수율 LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.