코엔원

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and 프라그마틱 게임 슬롯 무료; http://90pk.com/home.Php?mod=space&uid=418742, Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. 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 further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were 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 well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. 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 on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 정품인증 (visite site) a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the objectives 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 useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in 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 of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding 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 a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.