Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.
A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.
DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria,
프라그마틱 무료체험 such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through 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 DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and
프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and 라이브 카지노,
Sciencewiki.Science,
프라그마틱 무료게임 read each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. 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 CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's 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 a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts.
