The Best Place To Research Pragmatic Online
페이지 정보
작성자 Anne 댓글 0건 조회 3회 작성일 24-10-23 17:51본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. 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 their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews
The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and 프라그마틱 무료 RIs. Participants comprised 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 in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, 프라그마틱 무료 the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was built 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 experiment showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.
DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. 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 their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews
The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and 프라그마틱 무료 RIs. Participants comprised 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 in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, 프라그마틱 무료 the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was built 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 experiment showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.