Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or
프라그마틱 플레이 assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and
프라그마틱 홈페이지 추천 (
calhoun-Dahlgaard-4.blogbright.net) then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and
프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or
프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and
프라그마틱 슬롯체험 transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test 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 a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject.