관련링크
Why Adding A Pragmatic To Your Life's Activities Will Make All The Imp… |
작성일24-11-07 05:27 |
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 사이트 정품확인 (Https://Anotepad.Com) converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, 프라그마틱 순위 DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 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. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 think they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. 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 effects of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.
This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 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 select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.
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 questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.
The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.
CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 사이트 정품확인 (Https://Anotepad.Com) converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, 프라그마틱 순위 DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 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. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 think they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. 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 effects of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.
This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 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 select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.
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 questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.
The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.