Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and
프라그마틱 홈페이지 non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various aspects, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures 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 created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s 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 resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and
무료 프라그마틱 L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed,
프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and
프라그마틱 이미지 penalties they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's 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 strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings.