Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. As a result, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 정품인증 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 an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then 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 the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 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 revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to 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 even when they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.
The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.