Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.
DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 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 also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were 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 compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Interviews for refusal
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject 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 learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.