https://glamorouslengths.com/author/soundhead2/
last logged in on September 17, 2024 4:10 am
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in KoreanCLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including: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 drawbacks. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 used a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should 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 criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.Interviews for refusalThe most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required 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 answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.Case StudiesThe case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring 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 answers.The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.