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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 사이트 [click here for more] were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and 슬롯 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 could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was iterative by 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 the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The central 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 employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 슬롯 팁 (click here for more) L2 levels. 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 native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns 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 a useful model for 프라그마틱 슬롯 official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for 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 an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.