Are You Able To Research Pragmatic Online > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and 프라그마틱 플레이 (www.google.ki) then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 슬롯 추천 (https://www.google.Pl/) however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and 프라그마틱 환수율 is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for 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 favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns 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 unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research 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 objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated 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.