Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example). This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including: Discourse Construction Tests The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes. Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts. In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech. A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data. DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability. A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data. Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs) This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationships. 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 categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations. ?????? of the MQs and DCTs were then 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 experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms. The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors. Refusal Interviews (RIs) The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Recommended Resource site were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation. The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university. The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009). These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul. Case Studies The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods. The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context. This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality. Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness. The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.
Member since: Tuesday, December 17, 2024
Website: https://duckworth-lindgreen-2.federatedjournals.com/learn-more-about-pragmatic-slot-manipulation-while-working-from-at-home
The email you entered is already receiving Daily Bits Emails!
