Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some drawbacks. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However,
프라그마틱 무료스핀 (
Pragmatic-korea43197.blogzag.com) the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.
DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs,
프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each 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 transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Interviews for refusal
The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or 프라그마틱 무료게임 (
sources) L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered,
무료 프라그마틱 deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts.