10 Unexpected Pragmatic Tips > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 more steps can 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 the DCT has become one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, 프라그마틱 무료체험 and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals 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 factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with 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 familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence 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 within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based 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 investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on 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 to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.