Kristine Kersey

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 공식홈페이지 (bookmarkzones.trade) their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual 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 using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing 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 results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity 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 L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.