Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and 프라그마틱 무료 (
https://www.google.Bs) the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness,
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 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 used the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.
DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of 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 proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. 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 employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs,
프라그마틱 무료슬롯 and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor
프라그마틱 슬롯 at Stratways Group,
무료 프라그마틱 a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject.