What Experts On Pragmatic Want You To Know?
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to 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 avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For 프라그마틱 플레이 (https://bookmarksden.com/story18234448/how-to-make-an-Amazing-instagram-video-about-pragmatic-slots-experience) instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
In a recent study, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, 프라그마틱 체험 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add 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 level four on 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 questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding knowledge of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved 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 provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to 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 avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For 프라그마틱 플레이 (https://bookmarksden.com/story18234448/how-to-make-an-Amazing-instagram-video-about-pragmatic-slots-experience) instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
In a recent study, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, 프라그마틱 체험 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add 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 level four on 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 questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding knowledge of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved 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 provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
- 이전글Discover Why Webcam Sex Sites Are So Time-Consuming 25.01.01
- 다음글Excel 2007 - Which File Format Is Ideal? 25.01.01
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.