Pragmatic Tips From The Best In The Business > 자유게시판

• 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 their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. 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 of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 정품확인 (click through the up coming web page) lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses 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, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 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, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 무료 프라그마틱 프라그마틱 슬롯 [Visit Web Page] where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's 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 strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to study unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.