Your Family Will Thank You For Having This Pragmatic > 자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were important. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, 프라그마틱 체험 무료스핀 (bookmarkfriend.Com) but also some disadvantages. For example 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 can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by 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 research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, 슬롯 and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives 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 read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and 프라그마틱 순위 its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.