Your Family Will Be Thankful For Getting This Pragmatic
페이지 정보
작성자 Helen 작성일24-11-22 02:57 조회5회 댓글0건관련링크
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor 프라그마틱 이미지 (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 (www.northwestu.Edu) the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 like form and 프라그마틱 content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose 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 the CLKs frequently resorted to 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 CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed 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 testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews, 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 a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor 프라그마틱 이미지 (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 (www.northwestu.Edu) the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 like form and 프라그마틱 content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose 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 the CLKs frequently resorted to 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 CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed 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 testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews, 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 a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.
