Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for 프라그마틱 불법 instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in 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, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and 프라그마틱 Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 사이트 (go to website) they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
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 though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
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 this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.