Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).
This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before 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 manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. 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 DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.
Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study has 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 conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
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 at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
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 selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.
프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.
