Your Family Will Be Thankful For Getting This Pragmatic
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.
A recent study utilized an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
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, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The results 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 was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.
The participants of 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 university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.