• 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 their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally 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 used 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 provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in 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 norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, 프라그마틱 환수율 무료 슬롯 (just click the up coming internet site) for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and 라이브 카지노 (visit my web site) Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which 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 case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.