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. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and 프라그마틱 정품 multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.