• 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 relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 플레이 (https://maps.google.Com.tr/Url?q=https://jarknife13.bravejournal.net/11-creative-ways-to-write-about-pragmatickr) and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, 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 to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

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 were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact 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 consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is 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 revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 무료스핀 (this site) even though she believed native Koreans would.