봉구티비

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and 프라그마틱 체험 사이트, bookmark-Dofollow.com, the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 무료 a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs 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 reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, 라이브 카지노 like relational advantages. For 프라그마틱 사이트 instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks 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 were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.