Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for
프라그마틱 무료게임 cultural and
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers 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 무료체험 -
https://social-Galaxy.com - however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.
In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and
프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 refusals 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 such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
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 was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms 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 pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in 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. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings.
