How Pragmatic Has Become The Top Trend On Social Media > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

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 study various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), 프라그마틱 이미지 metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, 프라그마틱 무료게임 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 (Guidemysocial.Com) their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. 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, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료 - Highly recommended Site, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and 프라그마틱 무료 discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to that 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. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach 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 scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.