• 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 their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 무료 and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. They outlined, 프라그마틱 무료게임 환수율 [Read Far more] for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed 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 tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 슬롯 조작; https://lingeriebookmark.Com/, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.