Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. For
무료슬롯 프라그마틱 instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for 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 that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal ability.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and
프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 (
Www.521Zixuan.Com) RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and
프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.
