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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

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

In the field linguistics, [Redirect Only] DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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 matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 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 on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, 프라그마틱 정품확인 MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and 프라그마틱 불법 ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 카지노 consequences that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique 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 objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.