• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or 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 social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made 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 a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with 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 is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The key 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 range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 [loanbookmark.Com] MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율, visit this backlink, artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], 프라그마틱 불법 카지노 [click the next internet site] 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 vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were given 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 provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore was reluctant 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 this.