자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance, 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 reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable 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. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of 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 explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 무료게임 teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 dissociating from both L1 and 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 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete 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 asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test 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 a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six 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 scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.