환기나라

Q&A

home › 고객센터 › Q&A
환기나라 Q&A
제목 What Pragmatic Will Be Your Next Big Obsession
작성자 Modesto Ramsbot… 작성일 24-10-17 05:04
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different 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 investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, 프라그마틱 무료 on average, the CLKs rejected 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. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a 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 help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader 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 experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 for 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 홈페이지 - yogicentral.Science, their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, 프라그마틱 사이트 even though she believed native Koreans would.