Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in 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 in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, 프라그마틱 추천 turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for 프라그마틱 무료스핀 collecting data.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews
The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for 프라그마틱 불법 Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a wider theoretical context.
This study was based on 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 showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.
The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 understanding and their understanding of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.