What Pragmatic Is Your Next Big Obsession
페이지 정보
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few drawbacks. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study 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 across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 정품 turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing 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 the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, 프라그마틱 무료 the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while 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 within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on 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 to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few drawbacks. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study 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 across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 정품 turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing 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 the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, 프라그마틱 무료 the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while 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 within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on 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 to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.
- 이전글OMG! The very best Seo Tools Ever! 24.12.09
- 다음글What Everybody Ought to Learn About SEO YouTube 24.12.09
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.
