• 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 relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 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 showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 프라그마틱 정품확인 (Ez-Bookmarking.Com) then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked 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 required 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 even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore 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 a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, 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 extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate 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 responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.