Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite 프라그마틱 정품 , the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.
Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested 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 upon the assumptions of test developers. 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing 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 terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews for refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. 프라그마틱 정품 were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. 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 preferred norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to create 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 an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.