Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 무료 슬롯 (
express-page.com) (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made 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 utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs,
프라그마틱 플레이 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 complete the MQs in either 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,
프라그마틱 카지노 on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject.