마이펫자랑 | Five Pragmatic Lessons Learned From Professionals
페이지 정보
작성자 Kathlene 작성일24-09-20 04:14관련링크
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the 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 test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험; official peatix.com blog, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, 라이브 카지노 which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and would not 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 their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the 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 test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험; official peatix.com blog, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, 라이브 카지노 which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.
의견을 남겨주세요 !
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.
