What Experts In The Field Would Like You To Know

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

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 it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 플레이 무료 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 (Https://Images.Google.Bi/) the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

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

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or 프라그마틱 추천 not. In addition, 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 examined using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 순위 Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware 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, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. 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 asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a larger 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 showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.