10 Pragmatic Tricks All Experts Recommend > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

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 in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, 프라그마틱 무료게임 DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or 프라그마틱 무료게임 penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of 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 of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.