Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example). This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as: Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs) The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes. Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics. In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking. A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data. DCTs are usually 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 may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence. In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did. Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs) This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching. First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations. The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 also revealed the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior. Refusal Interviews One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider 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 this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university. The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. ????? ?? ?? were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009). These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul. Case Studies The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess. In find more info , the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework. This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers. Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness. Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.
Member since: Wednesday, September 11, 2024
Website: https://godwin-bean-2.thoughtlanes.net/do-not-forget-slot-10-reasons-why-you-do-not-need-it
The email you entered is already receiving Daily Bits Emails!
