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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

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 manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 라이브 카지노 (Allyourbookmarks.Com) we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 무료 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 complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect 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 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures 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 korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 정품확인방법, myeasybookmarks.Com, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.