Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and
프라그마틱 정품인증 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT 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 cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of measuring 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 revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and
프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then,
프라그마틱 데모 we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Interviews for refusal
The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about 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 despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and
프라그마틱 슬롯버프 무료 슬롯버프,
matkafasi.Com, multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
