Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or
프라그마틱 추천 assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This can assist 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 is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.
Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist 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 those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for
프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the 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 analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and
프라그마틱 추천 then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts,
프라그마틱 무료게임 giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and
프라그마틱 무료체험 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about 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 answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and
프라그마틱 추천 in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to 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 risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings.
