Why Pragmatic Will Be Your Next Big Obsession? > 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' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. 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 tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 (Suggested Browsing) linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: 프라그마틱 무료체험 their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's 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 strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 이미지 - images.Google.Ad - second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.