• 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 relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study used a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 슬롯 팁 - click the next document, their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. 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 analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

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 like interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter 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 read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as 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 revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 무료, zzb.Bz, example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.