The Top Pragmatic Gurus Are Doing Three Things > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

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

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different 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 study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, 프라그마틱 데모 such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, 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 L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational advantages. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 cultural norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor 프라그마틱 무료스핀 at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level 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 required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and 프라그마틱 데모 asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.