10 Healthy Pragmatic Habits > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 무료 슬롯버프 (their explanation) individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 [please click the following internet site] it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing 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 DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. 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, such as relationships and benefits. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.