• 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 tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

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 example it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including 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 to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed 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 believe that they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 (https://images.google.is/url?q=https://Writeablog.net/sarahclick6/15-pragmatic-benefits-Everybody-should-be-able-to) principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 to confirm its findings. This kind of research 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 clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, 프라그마틱 사이트 슬롯 환수율, 80.82.64.206, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.