The Lesser-Known Benefits Of Pragmatic > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

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 investigate various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, 프라그마틱 정품 such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including 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 DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 체험 (rotatesites.com) z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators develop 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 a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in 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 required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.