• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or 프라그마틱 환수율 - meshbookmarks.Com, more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on 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 showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought 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. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 순위 홈페이지, thebookmarkfree.Com, 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 rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 penalties that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the goals 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 read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.