Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.
DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then,
프라그마틱 게임 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트무료 (
just click the up coming website) the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question by 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
무료 프라그마틱 their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.
This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
The participants of 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 at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.
