관련링크
The Lesser-Known Benefits Of Pragmatic |
작성일24-09-26 14:40 |
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in 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 instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and 슬롯 (Squareblogs.net) were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for 프라그마틱 플레이 data collection.
DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend 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 norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This study was based 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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 홈페이지 (click the following document) third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide 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 would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in 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 instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and 슬롯 (Squareblogs.net) were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for 프라그마틱 플레이 data collection.
DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend 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 norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This study was based 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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 홈페이지 (click the following document) third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide 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 would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.