Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.
A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing 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 of data collection.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. 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 whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then 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 inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms 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 L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. 라이브 카지노 were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe 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 are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.
This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.