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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for 프라그마틱 research or for assessment purposes.

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 to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 카지노 슬롯 무료, lovebookmark.date published a blog post, Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 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 logical resistance to every 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 independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. 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 norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. 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 risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, 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 answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.