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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. 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 pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms 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 preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The 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 who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and 프라그마틱 카지노 discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature 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 may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 무료 and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.