10 Healthy Pragmatic Habits
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing 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
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, 프라그마틱 카지노 personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 슬롯 조작 (Look At This) a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.
This study was based on 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing 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
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, 프라그마틱 카지노 personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 슬롯 조작 (Look At This) a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.
This study was based on 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.
- 이전글The Ugly Real Truth Of Pragmatic Product Authentication 25.02.16
- 다음글5 Arguments Macaw Purchase Is Actually A Great Thing 25.02.16
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.