Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 환수율, prev, lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.
A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included 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 was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently 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 led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, 프라그마틱 무료 MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete 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 patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They outlined, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.