Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 정품 (blog post from Ezmarkbookmarks) required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 라이브 카지노 more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of 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 showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Interviews for refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 라이브 카지노 their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like 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 facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.