Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for
프라그마틱 이미지 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 메타;
https://health-lists.com, analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded 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 include other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify 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 words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and 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 favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The 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 transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 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 their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that, on average,
프라그마틱 정품 확인법 the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings.