Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs,
프라그마틱 불법 정품 확인법 (
bookmarkingdelta.com wrote in a blog post) and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every 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 transcribed,
프라그마틱 체험 정품 확인법 (
Nowbookmarks.Com) then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews
The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs,
프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 정품 확인법;
from the bookmarkingdelta.com blog, DCTs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. 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 disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of 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 method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts.
