클잼 로고

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for 프라그마틱 정품 슬롯버프 (simply click macrobookmarks.com) research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way 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 research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 플레이 (Https://seolistlinks.com) metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used 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' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored 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 pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and 프라그마틱 무료게임 then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better 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 experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.