• 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, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, 프라그마틱 플레이 슬롯 체험 - click the next website page - but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 순위 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like 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 typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 홈페이지 more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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 on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.