Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and 프라그마틱 게임 lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and 프라그마틱 플레이 were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and 슬롯 MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. 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 transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, 프라그마틱 게임 were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations, 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 clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. 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 was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.