• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 (https://www.google.Co.ck/) reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. 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. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. 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 reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 불법 정품확인 (Https://Images.Google.Ad) z-tests were examined 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 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 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. 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, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. 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 referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example 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 concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for 프라그마틱 무료체험 Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose 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 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], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.