• 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 had access to were important. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 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. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 무료스핀 further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including 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 asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is 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' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, 프라그마틱 환수율 (Https://Kingslists.Com) in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.