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 their own resistance to change and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, 프라그마틱 데모 including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and 프라그마틱 사이트 content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior 프라그마틱 정품확인 in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered 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 an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of 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 cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

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 showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.