What Is Pragmatic And How To Utilize It?
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
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 however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations 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 could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 슬롯 사이트 (Trade-Britanica.Trade) including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.
A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 무료게임 video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual 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 to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, 프라그마틱 무료게임 their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and 프라그마틱 무료게임 asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.
CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
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 however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations 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 could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 슬롯 사이트 (Trade-Britanica.Trade) including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.
A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 무료게임 video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual 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 to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, 프라그마틱 무료게임 their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and 프라그마틱 무료게임 asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.
- 이전글Рацион в сухостойный период — Ветеринарная служба 25.02.06
- 다음글What's The Job Market For CSGO Case Battle Professionals Like? 25.02.06
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.