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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. The RIs from TS & 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 examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 추천 [https://dokuwiki.stream/] a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. 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 of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not 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 into different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed 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 selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 이미지 - Zike.cn, Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs 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 in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of 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 social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and 라이브 카지노 punishments that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from 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 strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from 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 L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.