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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for 라이브 카지노 discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship 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 help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most 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, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed 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 selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for 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 favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 프라그마틱 사이트 (Gorillasocialwork.Com) L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. 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 for refusal

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

The results showed that, on average, 프라그마틱 사이트 the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 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 actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from 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 third or second year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.