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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and 프라그마틱 카지노 cultural differences. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria 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 are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 체험 metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be 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 for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as 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 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in 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 with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 플레이 RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete 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 situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader 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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding 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 provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 for example said she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.