Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. For instance,
프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 슬롯 조작,
https://cameradb.review/wiki/five_things_youve_Never_learned_about_pragmatic_recommendations, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in 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 ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and
프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 불법 (
visit my web site) include other types of methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.
The results 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 was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences 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 L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts,
프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think 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 preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts.
