Check Out What Pragmatic Tricks Celebs Are Utilizing > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

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 social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 체험 turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found 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 the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 순위 (fellowfavorite.Com) transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs 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 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, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 카지노 punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.