자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 정품 (shorl.com) including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 (Gdchuanxin.Com) relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance 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 coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with various experiments, 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 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 CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is 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 tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.