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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and 라이브 카지노 [https://Atomcraft.Ru] multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for 프라그마틱 체험 L2 Korean assessment.

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 on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. 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 relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to 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 out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which are best left out. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.