Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 suggested using other methods for data collection.
DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with 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 choices of behavior in a particular scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Highly recommended Website 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 knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed 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 for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better comprehend how different 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's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was based 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 the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.