The Little-Known Benefits Of Pragmatic > 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 learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core 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. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. 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, 프라그마틱 사이트 정품 사이트 (mysocialname.com) on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.