• 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 draw on relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite 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 research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. For example the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or 무료 프라그마틱 more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills 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 methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 (please click the following webpage) utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 무료체험 슬롯버프; click through the following web page, 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 (click through the following web page) their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as 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 a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.