Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and
프라그마틱 사이트 무료체험 메타 [
https://thesocialcircles.com/story3642086/5-laws-that-will-help-those-in-pragmatic-image-industry] information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.
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 designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and
프라그마틱 무료게임 complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including interviews,
프라그마틱 홈페이지 observations and documents, to prove its findings.