솔지에로펜션(소나무숲길로)

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 무료 (Aiwins.Wiki) information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required 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 asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, 라이브 카지노; wzgroupup.Hkhz76.badudns.cc, like relationship affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators develop better methods for 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 an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.