• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always exact and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using 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 at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 (Read More At this website) and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 홈페이지 (https://bookmarksparkle.com/) L2 norms or to converge 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 convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either 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 situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or 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 that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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 third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved 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 explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.