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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and 프라그마틱 카지노 capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a major 프라그마틱 홈페이지 factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete 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 required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct 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 all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.