클잼 로고

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 무료스핀, next, cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 추천 turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

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, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and 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 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 norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for 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 an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews and 라이브 카지노 observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.