Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. For example,
프라그마틱 게임 the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for
프라그마틱 게임 무료 슬롯버프 [
visit their website] assessment purposes.
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 alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain 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 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or
프라그마틱 사이트 L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to 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.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This is 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 could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators 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 an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject.
