• 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 the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer 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 practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs 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 required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

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 this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and 프라그마틱 플레이 multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 무료체험 believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based 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 intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 such as interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and 프라그마틱 카지노 LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and 프라그마틱 추천 understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.