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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and 라이브 카지노 the relational affordances they had access to were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, 프라그마틱 슬롯 and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 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 also revealed the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 카지노; go to website, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

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

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.