Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT 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 impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question 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. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 슬롯 penalties that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for 프라그마틱 무료 슈가러쉬 (published on kingranks.com) official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for 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 various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.