20 Pragmatic Websites Taking The Internet By Storm > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and 프라그마틱 사이트 required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. 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 methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 카지노 (hyperlink) Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools 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 in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 불법 (bookmarkrange.Com) like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

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 matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on 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, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given 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. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.