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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor 프라그마틱 플레이 (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or 프라그마틱 정품인증 questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The 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 to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, 프라그마틱 게임 which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to 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 convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research 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 asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for 프라그마틱 카지노 Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea 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 a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.