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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate 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 can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 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 L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 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 research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 [mybookmark.stream] to place the case study in a broader 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 test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, 프라그마틱 무료체험 deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.