공지사항

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 프라그마틱 정품인증 - the full details, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, 프라그마틱 사이트 (the full details) and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to 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. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced 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 a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to 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 an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 슬롯 추천 (why not try this out) were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.