0 votes
by (140 points)
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and 프라그마틱 순위 프라그마틱 정품 확인법인증 (Firsturl.de) lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

imageThe RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in 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 resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be 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 different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts.

Your answer

Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Welcome to FluencyCheck, where you can ask language questions and receive answers from other members of the community.
...