There Are Myths And Facts Behind Pragmatic > 자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has some drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in 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 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 manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and 프라그마틱 이미지 conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined 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. 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 performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This is similar to the one 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 as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and 슬롯 beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.