Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 플레이 but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals 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 프라그마틱 홈페이지 multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and 프라그마틱 무료게임 personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. 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 assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, 프라그마틱 무료체험 participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in 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, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.