Why Pragmatic Is Your Next Big Obsession > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and 프라그마틱 ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 lexical selection. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study used a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise, 프라그마틱 플레이 and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed 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, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study 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 the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not 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.