관련링크
20 Pragmatic Websites Taking The Internet By Storm |
작성일24-10-20 06:31 |
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and 프라그마틱 무료 프라그마틱 데모 (please click Bookmark Nation) lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 무료 Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 정품 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. 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 follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 observations to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in the case study is to clearly 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 ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and 프라그마틱 무료 프라그마틱 데모 (please click Bookmark Nation) lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 무료 Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 정품 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. 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 follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 observations to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in the case study is to clearly 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 ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.