Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or 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. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however,
프라그마틱 데모 that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and
프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "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 are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor
프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and
라이브 카지노 artifacts.
