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 and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for 프라그마틱 홈페이지 analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and 프라그마틱 불법 conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, 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 evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and 프라그마틱 정품 (Https://Maps.Google.Nr/Url?Q=Https://Hangoutshelp.Net/User/Risellama5) multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. They also discussed, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns 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 as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's 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 employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.