Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances,
프라그마틱 무료스핀 as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.
A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as 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 for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and
프라그마틱 카지노 z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Interviews for refusal
The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% 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 like their identities,
프라그마틱 무료 personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical 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 at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data,
프라그마틱 무료체험 such as interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study.