Benny Rayburn

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and 무료 프라그마틱 used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and 프라그마틱 무료 read each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 슬롯프라그마틱 슬롯 무료, visit this page, RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method uses various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on 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 questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.