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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or 라이브 카지노 [Wisesocialsmedia.Com] assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, 프라그마틱 환수율 카지노 (please click the next web page) they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced 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 a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. 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 improve their methods of 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 method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on 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 required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, 슬롯 TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.