Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. For instance the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.
A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics 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 analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews
A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The 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 situation.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.