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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

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

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 데모 lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 체험 무료체험 (click the next website page) information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was 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' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and 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 performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every 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, and then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.