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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid 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

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: 라이브 카지노 their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were 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 experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and 프라그마틱 정품 discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

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 attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. 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 impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore, this will help educators 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 risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze 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 determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

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

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.