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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths but it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 홈페이지 L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered 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 the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, 프라그마틱 환수율 and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze unique or 프라그마틱 카지노 정품 확인법 - mybookmark.stream - complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose 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 helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, 프라그마틱 정품확인 or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.