Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).
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 popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore,
프라그마틱 정품 it should be analyzed carefully before using it for
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and
프라그마틱 데모 non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by 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 a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Interviews for refusal
The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or
프라그마틱 홈페이지 L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the pragmatic 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 actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities,
프라그마틱 홈페이지 and
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of 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 enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop 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 an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts.