자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally the DCT can 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 for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of 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 more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and 무료 프라그마틱 traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 (Xs.xylvip.Com) L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based 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 convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

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

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.