What Is The Reason? Pragmatic Is Fast Becoming The Most Popular Trend …
페이지 정보
작성자 Carlton 댓글 0건 조회 3회 작성일 24-09-18 14:22본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect 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 emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned 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 form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 정품확인 슬롯 사이트 [mozillabd.Science] and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. 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 gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews
The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or 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, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was built on 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 revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect 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 emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned 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 form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 정품확인 슬롯 사이트 [mozillabd.Science] and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. 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 gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews
The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or 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, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was built on 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 revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.