5 Pragmatic Lessons From The Pros > 자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed 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 to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 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 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect 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 natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and 슬롯 in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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 second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.