환기나라

Q&A

home › 고객센터 › Q&A
환기나라 Q&A
제목 There Are Myths And Facts Behind Pragmatic
작성자 Demetra 작성일 24-10-21 09:17
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프; squareblogs.net, ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual 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 for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial 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 place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is 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 highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach 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.