Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.
A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for
프라그마틱 추천 정품인증 [
jisuzm.com] linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions,
프라그마틱 환수율 and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities,
무료슬롯 프라그마틱 their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and
프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 슬롯 무료체험 -
mozillabd.Science, teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. 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 follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.