자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor 프라그마틱 무료 정품 (https://kingranks.com/author/greecegram2-1025029) (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. 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 were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing 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 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 an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

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 though they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and 무료 프라그마틱 which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 플레이 [Www.google.Ps] place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a 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.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.