Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and 프라그마틱 정품인증 traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. 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 also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, 프라그마틱 사이트 슬롯 조작 - Https://Sites2000.Com/ - such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.
This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.
The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.