Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For
프라그마틱 정품인증 instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics,
프라그마틱 사이트 DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and
프라그마틱 사이트 정품확인방법 (
best site) the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.
Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized less 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 at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.
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, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move 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 favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.