솔지에로펜션(소나무숲길로)

• 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 relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and 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. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and 라이브 카지노 (https://tupalo.com/en/users/7446609) Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 슬롯 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯체험 (mouse click the up coming internet site) their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. 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 method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.