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

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices 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. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The 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 showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 카지노 MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and 프라그마틱 환수율 identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's 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 method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the 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 to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based 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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation 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 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 at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.