Waller User

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. ????? ???? from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability 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 tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. ????? ?? showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely 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' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They 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 norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. ????? ?? mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore 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 uses multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.

Member since: Wednesday, September 18, 2024

Website: https://telegra.ph/10-Essentials-Regarding-Slot-You-Didnt-Learn-At-School-09-18