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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 more steps can be a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent 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 traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined 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 familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천체험 (Https://Www.Pinterest.Com/Witchsalary7) with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in 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 adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, 프라그마틱 카지노; https://click4R.Com/, such as relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to 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 a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

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

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

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.