Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. For 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 the second example).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 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 the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs 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, on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. 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 norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful 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 allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.
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 what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This study was conducted on an open source platform such as 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 revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.