자유게시판

10 Pragmatic Tips All Experts Recommend

작성자 정보

  • Vernon Oakley 작성
  • 작성일

본문

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and 프라그마틱 카지노 lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred 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 participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, 프라그마틱 무료 such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for 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 investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, 프라그마틱 순위 each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.

관련자료

댓글 0
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.

최근글


새댓글