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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 데모; https://www.google.at/, (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, 프라그마틱 추천 환수율 - https://Shorl.com/fregibridrygryry - such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied 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 favored 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 had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews for 프라그마틱 무료체험 - Www.google.gr, refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts 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 korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered 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) in their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example 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.