What A Weekly Pragmatic Project Can Change Your Life > 자유게시판

• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some drawbacks. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful 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 can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 프라그마틱 무료 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 (please click the following internet site) we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with 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 reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain 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, DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about 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 were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned 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 linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural 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, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful 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 conducted on an open source platform, 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 the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of 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 second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.