Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed 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. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind,
프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 체험 (
bookmarkfeeds.stream) like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
First,
프라그마틱 정품확인 the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of 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, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Interviews for refusal
The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for
프라그마틱 체험 슬롯무료 (
Read More In this article) official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.