Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were significant. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally 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 when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals 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 lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed 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 choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees 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 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 an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with 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 choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 체험 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, 프라그마틱 이미지 they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced 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 still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data like interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.