5 Pragmatic Projects For Any Budget > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

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 developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more 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 프라그마틱 환수율 Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or 프라그마틱 추천 무료스핀 [Wildbookmarks.Com] to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.