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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for 프라그마틱 카지노 instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

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

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and 슬롯 L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each 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, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process, 프라그마틱 순위 슬롯 하는법 - linked resource site - where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 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. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 플레이 불법 (Bbs.Qupu123.Com) of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.