Why Incorporating A Word Or Phrase Into Your Life Will Make All The Ch…
페이지 정보
작성자 Ute 댓글 0건 조회 4회 작성일 24-10-18 13:24본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and may lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
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 the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.
Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always correct, 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 testing refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought 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. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers 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 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 이미지 (steved123mcz1.wikififfi.com) instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and may lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
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 the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.
Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always correct, 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 testing refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought 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. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers 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 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 이미지 (steved123mcz1.wikififfi.com) instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.