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 learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 이미지 (Https://Nerdgaming.Science) but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found 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 include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 무료 프라그마틱 the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked 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% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and 프라그마틱 플레이 multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist 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 risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.