자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were important. For instance, RIs from 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 the second example).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order 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 with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be 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' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 - https://mozillabd.science/Wiki/Kimreese4290, ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, 프라그마틱 무료게임 the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's 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 investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify 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 her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.