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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For 프라그마틱 정품 instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 - Bfme.Net - in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, 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 criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors 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-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

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

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 정품 프라그마틱 사이트 (just click the following page) its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.