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. RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However,
프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and
프라그마틱 환수율 include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for
슬롯 further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating 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 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews
The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.
However,
프라그마틱 무료게임 정품인증 (
pragmatickorea42086.blogkoo.com) the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts.