5 Pragmatic Lessons From The Professionals
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and 프라그마틱 환수율 may cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and 무료 프라그마틱 a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each 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, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider 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 even when they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. 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 could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and 프라그마틱 환수율 may cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and 무료 프라그마틱 a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each 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, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider 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 even when they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. 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 could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.
- 이전글Fire Suite The Process Isn't As Hard As You Think 24.11.01
- 다음글10 Reasons That People Are Hateful Of Double Glazing Repair 24.11.01
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.