Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few drawbacks. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.
A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.
DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. 프라그마틱 체험 calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined 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 of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using several experimental tools 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 in their L1 or 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 follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. 무료 프라그마틱 were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.
The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based upon 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 this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. 무료 프라그마틱 had an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in 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 required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.