Welcome to Ent Overflow, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of the community.
0 votes
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

imageCLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, 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 pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, 프라그마틱 환수율 the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and 무료 프라그마틱 traditionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform 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 think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results 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 consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
by (200 points)

Your answer

Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
...