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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and 슬롯 individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating 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 프라그마틱 플레이 more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should 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 criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked 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 choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 [Https://Thesocialcircles.com] while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 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 L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 무료게임 believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.