What Experts In The Field Would Like You To Know?
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of 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 a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 무료체험 teaching.
First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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 CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for 프라그마틱 사이트 official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.
In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.
This study was conducted on an open source platform such as 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 vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.
CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of 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 a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 무료체험 teaching.
First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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 CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for 프라그마틱 사이트 official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.
In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.
This study was conducted on an open source platform such as 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 vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.
- 이전글티비위키 영화 ※링크모음※ 사이트순위 모음 사이트주소 밤토끼 24.11.12
- 다음글Bandar Online Togel Tools To Improve Your Daily Lifethe One Bandar Online Togel Trick That Should Be Used By Everyone Know 24.11.12
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.