Why Pragmatic Is Right For You > 자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 (https://Libroroom.ru) artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.