GOUTERGALLERY

• 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 learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior 라이브 카지노 in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, 프라그마틱 데모 (Www.ccf-Icare.Com) which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.