Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article examines 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 (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 may lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯; Humanlove.Stream, z-tests were analysed 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 was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer 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 their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for 프라그마틱 순위 환수율 (read more) Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. 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 kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider 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 the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain 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 connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.