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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 환수율 (wx.Abcvote.cn) can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for 프라그마틱 슬롯 - simply click the up coming webpage, choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed 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 of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for 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 a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. 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 in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.