Company Logo

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 조작 (click the up coming internet site) CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can 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 is a valuable tool for analyzing 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 could be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on 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 were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators create better methods for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 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 a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

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 which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding 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 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 respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, 프라그마틱 게임 무료체험 메타 (echobookmarks.com) each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.