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 mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.
A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and
프라그마틱 슬롯 utilized more hints 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. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and
프라그마틱 무료체험 refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. For
프라그마틱 무료게임 무료체험
프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율버프 (
https://bookmarkeasier.com/story18172690/why-you-should-focus-on-the-improvement-of-pragmatic-Free) instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't 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 revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject.