관련링크
20 Pragmatic Websites Taking The Internet By Storm |
작성일24-10-23 19:38 |
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. 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 pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing 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 often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 게임 (images.google.com.Hk) transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding 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)
The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 게임 - Recommended Internet page - on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This worry was similar to that 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 a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to 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 a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.
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 aspects can be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or 프라그마틱 순위 second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. 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 pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing 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 often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 게임 (images.google.com.Hk) transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding 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)
The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 게임 - Recommended Internet page - on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This worry was similar to that 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 a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to 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 a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.
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 aspects can be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or 프라그마틱 순위 second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.