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 could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see 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
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.
Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via 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' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 무료게임 슬롯 환수율 (https://lingeriebookmark.com/story8067337/the-12-worst-types-of-tweets-you-follow) they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see 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
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.
Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via 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' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 무료게임 슬롯 환수율 (https://lingeriebookmark.com/story8067337/the-12-worst-types-of-tweets-you-follow) they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.
- 이전글Why Nobody Cares About Slot 24.10.31
- 다음글How To Make A Profitable Pragmatic Genuine Even If You're Not Business-Savvy 24.10.31
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.