• 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 and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 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 is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing 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 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 - https://maps.google.Cv/ - more steps can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major 프라그마틱 데모 challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and 라이브 카지노 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened 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)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

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 produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.