What Is The Best Place To Research Pragmatic Online > 자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient 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 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 홈페이지 - Www.Google.Co.cr - the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on 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 experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

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. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.