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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local 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 (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, 프라그마틱 추천 it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain 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. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, 프라그마틱 카지노 MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for 프라그마틱 불법 무료슬롯 - Hl0803.Com, teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.