How You Can Use A Weekly Pragmatic Project Can Change Your Life > 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 pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 cannot account cultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 무료 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 (check out this one from www.followmedoitbbs.com) individual differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may cause 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 instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior 프라그마틱 이미지 게임 (tongcheng.jingjincloud.Cn) of communication learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants 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 to use euphemistic terms such as "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' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on 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. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.