Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking,
프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 슬롯 추천 (
https://maps.google.no/url?q=https://avila-peck.Thoughtlanes.net/10-pragmatic-free-trial-meta-tricks-experts-recommend) turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or
프라그마틱 무료슬롯 questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs are usually developed 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 creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions,
프라그마틱 순위 플레이 (
https://www.Google.ps) and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and
프라그마틱 불법 L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews for refusal
The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.