10 Pragmatic Tips All Experts Recommend > 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 pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 슬롯무료 (https://squareblogs.Net) refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined 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 of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 (www.annunciogratis.Net) their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.