Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for 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 their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 무료 프라그마틱 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 (index) observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in 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 asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.