Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.
A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. 프라그마틱 were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews for refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on 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 responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.
The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.