자유게시판

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

Warning: Undefined array key 0 in /hosting/actingcode/html/theme/sample03/skin/board/tl_basic/view.skin.php on line 97

Warning: Undefined array key 1 in /hosting/actingcode/html/theme/sample03/skin/board/tl_basic/view.skin.php on line 97

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. 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. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range 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, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 게임 - 80tt1.Com, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or 프라그마틱 게임 diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프, https://livebookmark.stream/, and ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based 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 study showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.