Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and 프라그마틱 슬롯 learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally 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 such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, 프라그마틱 정품 the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and 프라그마틱 정품인증 testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide 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 so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.