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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL, for 라이브 카지노; https://telegra.ph/15-Reasons-To-Not-Overlook-Pragmatic-Slots-Free-Trial-09-15, example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

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 aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and 프라그마틱 이미지 (why not try here) Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 플레이 슬롯체험 (more..) we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 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 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.