마이펫자랑 | The Best Pragmatic The Gurus Are Using Three Things
페이지 정보
작성자 Xavier 작성일24-09-26 04:33관련링크
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.
A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and 프라그마틱 then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in 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, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on 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 answers. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. For 프라그마틱 플레이 instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 슬롯 하는법 (Recommended Internet site) consequences that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.
This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], 프라그마틱 불법 and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.
A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and 프라그마틱 then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in 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, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on 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 answers. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. For 프라그마틱 플레이 instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 슬롯 하는법 (Recommended Internet site) consequences that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.
This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], 프라그마틱 불법 and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
의견을 남겨주세요 !
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.
