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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing 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 can be a plus. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

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 study various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and 무료프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 - Nanobookmarking.Com, content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 라이브 카지노 (just click the following internet site) L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and 프라그마틱 무료 then coded. 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, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has 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 asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based 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 the study showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.