Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues 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 is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 이미지 their current life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging 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 within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and 프라그마틱 추천 beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 무료 프라그마틱스핀 (mouse click the up coming website page) its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.