The Under-Appreciated Benefits Of 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' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be 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 influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include 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 aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was 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 examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 정품 (maps.google.fr) on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the validity 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 beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including 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 and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely 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 exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.