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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core 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, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account 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 evaluation.

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 in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making 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 MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: 프라그마틱 데모 their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 라이브 카지노 teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. For instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and 라이브 카지노 observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.