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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, 라이브 카지노 turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and 프라그마틱 슬롯 form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 체험 (https://adsbookmark.com/story18088586/pragmatic-Slots-return-rate-strategies-from-the-top-in-the-industry) RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs 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 L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 (redhotbookmarks.com) 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 testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.