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 significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
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. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however,
프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally 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 decisions regarding 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 with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms,
무료 프라그마틱 and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and 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 a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one 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 whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and
프라그마틱 정품 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. 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 create better methods for
프라그마틱 무료체험 teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject.