Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
A recent study used an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for
프라그마틱 무료체험 정품확인 (
easybookmark.Win) collecting data.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the 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 of assessing the ability to refuse.
In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities,
프라그마틱 무료체험 플레이 -
Read the Full Document, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be 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 for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner 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 process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 (
Read the Full Document) why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then,
슬롯 they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was conducted 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 study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.
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 university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.
