Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.
Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from,
프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However,
프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using 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, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for
프라그마틱 무료스핀 teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 데모 -
Nyholm-hald-2.technetbloggers.de, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and
프라그마틱 정품확인 artifacts.