클잼 로고

• 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 social ties they had access to were crucial. For 프라그마틱 체험 (inquiry) instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and 프라그마틱 데모 then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including 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 their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and 슬롯 documents to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, 프라그마틱 무료 the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four in 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 asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.