• 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 social ties they had access to were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or 라이브 카지노 more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, 라이브 카지노 and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained 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 examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had 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 discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required 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 on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, 프라그마틱 환수율 정품확인 (Click Home) they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may 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 know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.