What Pragmatic Could Be Your Next Big Obsession?
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, 슬롯 such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. 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 more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 체험 (Linkingbookmark.com) refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.
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 is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, 슬롯 such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. 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 more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 체험 (Linkingbookmark.com) refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.
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 is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.
- 이전글20 Fun Details About Best Side By Side Fridge Freezer 24.09.24
- 다음글Why Integrated Fridge Freezer Side By Side Can Be Much More Hazardous Than You Think 24.09.24
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.