Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 focuses on the practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.
Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including 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 reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs 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 required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as “foreigners” and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
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 this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.