Five Pragmatic Lessons From Professionals
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.
Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to 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 showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major 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 by employing a variety of research instruments, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 불법 (Bookmarkfly.Com) including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked 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 on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives 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 research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.
This study was based 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 L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.
CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.
Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to 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 showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major 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 by employing a variety of research instruments, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 불법 (Bookmarkfly.Com) including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked 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 on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives 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 research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.
This study was based 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 L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.
- 이전글How To Identify The Electric Powered Wheelchairs That's Right For You 24.11.01
- 다음글5 Laws That Can Benefit The Free Standing Electric Fireplace Industry 24.11.01
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.