Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has its drawbacks. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.
Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires,
프라그마틱 게임 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either 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 whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews
The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. 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 rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and
프라그마틱 슬롯 ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations,
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 슬롯 (
click the next web page) documents, and artifacts.