20 Pragmatic Websites Taking The Internet By Storm
페이지 정보
작성자 Debora 댓글 0건 조회 13회 작성일 24-09-28 00:07본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' 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 with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 - updated blog post - discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. 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 norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing 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 investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
The first step in the 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 investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 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 answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
The participants of 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 reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' 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 with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 - updated blog post - discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Interviews with Refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. 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 norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing 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 investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
The first step in the 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 investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 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 answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
The participants of 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 reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.