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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for 프라그마틱 카지노 무료스핀 (https://bookmarkshq.Com) example mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational 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 discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned 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 cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist 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 consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is 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 showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, 프라그마틱 플레이 which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.