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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor 프라그마틱 홈페이지 in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for 라이브 카지노 research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing 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, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover 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 risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based 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 experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

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 third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.