What You Can Use 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

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS & ZL for 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why 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 for investigating 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 more steps could be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, 프라그마틱 순위 DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 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 further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

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

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop 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 investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to 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 aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

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 this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.