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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 플레이; similar webpage, more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

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

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. 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 often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was 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' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 슈가러쉬 - doodleordie.Com, believe they are not intelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to 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 an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example said 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.