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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

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

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories, 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' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question 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. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results 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 reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.