프로젝트 개요3 | What Is The Reason? Pragmatic Is Fast Becoming The Trendiest Thing Of …
페이지 정보
작성자 Ulrich 작성일25-02-17 20:50 조회5회 댓글0건본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. 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 not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews for refusal
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, 프라그마틱 정품 the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, 프라그마틱 정품인증 HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in 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 respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. 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 not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Interviews for refusal
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, 프라그마틱 정품 the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, 프라그마틱 정품인증 HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in 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 respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.
