• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 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. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or 슬롯 assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and 프라그마틱 이미지 슬롯 사이트 (Glamorouslengths official blog) Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experiments, 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 to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 슬롯 무료체험 (just click the following webpage) their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

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 were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.