Sargent User

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. ????? ???? ?? can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across 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 investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, ????? ?? ??? cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined 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, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation 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 the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.


Additionally, the participants in this 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 to reach level 6 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 hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.

Member since: Thursday, September 19, 2024

Website: https://beretrugby7.werite.net/how-pragmatic-became-the-top-trend-in-social-media