관련링크
Pragmatic Tools To Facilitate Your Day-To-Day Life |
작성일24-10-23 11:52 |
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 social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used 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. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for 프라그마틱 게임 analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 testing refusal competence.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed 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 explored Chinese learners' pragmatic 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 of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯 사이트 (image source) DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found 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 resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 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. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for 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 investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, 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 choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used 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. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for 프라그마틱 게임 analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 testing refusal competence.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed 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 explored Chinese learners' pragmatic 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 of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯 사이트 (image source) DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found 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 resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 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. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for 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 investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, 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 choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.