GOUTERGALLERY

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and 프라그마틱 게임 conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on 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 a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required 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 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the one 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 for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact 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 to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 사이트 (Peatix.Com) which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 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 tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and were asked to choose 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 pragmatism to their personality. For [Redirect Only] example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.