The Reasons Pragmatic Isn't As Easy As You Imagine > 자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily 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 pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had 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 the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 프라그마틱 불법 (new post from intensedebate.com) they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own 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 referred external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, 프라그마틱 환수율 which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 정품 확인법 (see this) second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.