Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and 무료 프라그마틱 체험 - https://bbs.Pku.edu.Cn - the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into 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 showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. 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 DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 무료 (internet site) z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 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 also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 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 their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relational advantages. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in 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 interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.