자유게시판

• 목록
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and 프라그마틱 사이트 게임 - Talentostartapero.Com, can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as 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 knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for 프라그마틱 무료체험 official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 무료체험 and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to 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 explore a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects 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 to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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 university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.