Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody,
프라그마틱 사이트 information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.
Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and
프라그마틱 체험 are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition,
프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and 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 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and
프라그마틱 플레이 transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider 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% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior
프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 정품확인방법 (
Imoodle.Win) and interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for 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 a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
