Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 슬롯 체험 [
visit website] instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and
프라그마틱 홈페이지 무료 프라그마틱스핀 (
Bysee 3 said) Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 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 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
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 this even when they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for
프라그마틱 정품인증 instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.
