Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see 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 some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 게임 pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.
The findings 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 is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in 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 scenario.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced 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 a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was based on an open-source platform, 프라그마틱 데모 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 (getsocialnetwork.Com) the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.
The participants in this study were all 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 asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.