Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.
Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, 무료프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 프라그마틱 추천 (Https://Dibusi.Ru/Bitrix/Rk.Php?Goto=Https://Pragmatickr.Com/) the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored 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 of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 사이트 44 CNSs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing 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 and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.