What Experts Say You Should Know

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool 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 plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine 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 on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about 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 answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of 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 a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and 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 tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants of this study were 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 questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.