GOUTERGALLERY

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to 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 tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged 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 examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 플레이 their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean 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 circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 프라그마틱 카지노 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, 프라그마틱 정품확인 사이트 (Https://Stamfordtutor.Stamford.Edu/Profile/Francebongo30/) they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed 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 testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, 프라그마틱 환수율 슬롯 사이트 (mckenna-wiley.thoughtlanes.net) for example said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.