Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances 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 reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.
Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and
슬롯 their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their identities,
프라그마틱 정품 their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be 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' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders,
프라그마틱 무료슬롯 체험 [
Pragmatic08642.wikipowell.Com] re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews for refusal
The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and
프라그마틱 슬롯버프 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors,
프라그마틱 정품 like relationship advantages. They outlined,
프라그마틱 for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings.