Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 (
taikwu.com.tw) in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues,
프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety 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 proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors:
프라그마틱 무료슬롯 their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and
프라그마틱 플레이 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either 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 situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For
라이브 카지노 instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could 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 cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.
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 what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.
This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.
