Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 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' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.
A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
프라그마틱 무료슬롯 compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. 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 examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation 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 define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger 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 the test revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 were then asked to provide the reasoning behind 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 approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.