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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 게임 - Bookmarkbooth.Com, more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. 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 ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of 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 developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 체험 (Highly recommended Reading) in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used 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 understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 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 further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in 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 code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The key 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 a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data including documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants 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 rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.