• 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, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: 프라그마틱 정품인증 플레이, https://bengalfrench0.werite.net/12-companies-leading-the-way-in-pragmatic-free, their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, 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 first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 believe they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and 프라그마틱 무료게임 refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.