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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and 무료 프라그마틱 무료체험 - https://www.Xuetu123.Com/ - ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely 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' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand 프라그마틱 무료체험 the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test 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 a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.