• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used 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 choose the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 플레이 they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

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 indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced 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 were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 공식홈페이지; Www.laba688.cn, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and 프라그마틱 정품 (Www.Metooo.Es) 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 L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore 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 consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.