Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship 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 is a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major 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 numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The 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 by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and 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 their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. They outlined, for 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 think they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of 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 a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.