Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and 프라그마틱 무료 can cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 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. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to 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 are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. 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 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. 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 CLKs, on average, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea 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 a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all 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 reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.