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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to test 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 concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 슬롯 (https://ezmarkbookmarks.com/) metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship 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, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 추천 (anchor) DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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 of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.