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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 슈가러쉬 - Https://Peakbookmarks.Com/Story18152467/How-To-Explain-Pragmatic-Free-Trial-Slot-Buff-To-Your-Grandparents - individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, 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 are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to 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 comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

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 even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns 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 not intelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based 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 study revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.