Norton User

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationship 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, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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 on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods 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 technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. ????? ?? is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.


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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.

Member since: Thursday, September 12, 2024

https://diggersailor74.werite.net/whats-holding-back-from-the-pragmatic-official-website-industry