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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for 프라그마틱 카지노 research or evaluation.

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

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and 프라그마틱 불법 utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored 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 participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider 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 answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 (tawassol.Univ-tebessa.Dz) beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test 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 strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.