Five Pragmatic Lessons Learned From Professionals

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews 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 an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication 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' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 should include other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationships. 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 was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and 프라그마틱 데모 - mysocialguides.com, discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete 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 asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.