Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it 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. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.
A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. 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 revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as “foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. 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 norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of 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 utilizes multiple data sources 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 topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader 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 highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and understanding of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.