Your Family Will Thank You For Having This Pragmatic > 자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For 무료 프라그마틱슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 (http://Icanfixupmyhome.Com/) 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 a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.