Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 , for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument 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 ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually 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 the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to 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 showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Interviews for refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
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 patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners” and think they were incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding knowledge of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.