Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues,
프라그마틱 무료체험 including manner of speaking, turn-taking,
프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found 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 led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or
프라그마틱 정품 departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to 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 further 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 the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. For example,
프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 [
aiwins.wiki] they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and
프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 observations, to support its findings.
