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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

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 various issues, including politeness, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 (https://sciencewiki.Science/) turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety 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 that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to that 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 useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, 프라그마틱 환수율 슬롯 사이트 (Https://Clinfowiki.Win/Wiki/Post:5_Pragmatic_Free_Trial_Meta_Projects_For_Any_Budget) HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test 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 accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.