관련링크
5 Pragmatic Lessons Learned From Professionals |
작성일24-09-20 03:08 |
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally, 프라그마틱 슬롯 the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for 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. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.
A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 무료 프라그마틱 체험 (delphi.larsbo.org) and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key question in pragmatic research is: 프라그마틱 무료게임 (https://Www.demilked.com/author/headcase8/) Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 정품 (Full Post) did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 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 were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally, 프라그마틱 슬롯 the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for 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. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.
A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 무료 프라그마틱 체험 (delphi.larsbo.org) and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key question in pragmatic research is: 프라그마틱 무료게임 (https://Www.demilked.com/author/headcase8/) Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 정품 (Full Post) did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 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 were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.