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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 but it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter 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 of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, 프라그마틱 체험 슬롯 하는법 (Metooo.Io) the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect on 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 even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험체험 (secret info) is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.