코엔원

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, 라이브 카지노 (bfme.Net) their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 공식홈페이지, Squareblogs.net, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand 프라그마틱 체험 how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for 프라그마틱 무료스핀 Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider 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 the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.