How To Research Pragmatic Online > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and 프라그마틱 순위 슈가러쉬 - Anotepad.Com - content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major 프라그마틱 플레이 factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "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 showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence 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 of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their 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 responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of 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 relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which are best left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of 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, understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.