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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 무료 factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and 프라그마틱 카지노 based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always accurate, and 프라그마틱 정품 they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) 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. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. 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 norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns 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 useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, 프라그마틱 게임 and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.