Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned,
프라그마틱 무료슬롯 however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks,
슬롯 metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and
슬롯 their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and
프라그마틱 체험 punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic.