• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths, but it also has some drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 슈가러쉬 (Justpin.date) they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example 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 their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings 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. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's 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 strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, 무료 프라그마틱 observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, 무료 프라그마틱 and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.