10 Pragmatic Tricks All Experts Recommend > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to 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 to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from 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 investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. 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 to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험버프; simply click the next site, transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to 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, on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is 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 extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.