What Makes The Pragmatic So Effective? During COVID-19
페이지 정보
작성자 Lona 댓글 0건 조회 7회 작성일 24-12-28 14:15본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of 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 important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, 프라그마틱 슬롯 such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and were 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 that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as 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 DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for 슬롯 L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance with respect 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 violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe 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 norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 사이트 (Gpsites.win) as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, 프라그마틱 환수율 HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of 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 important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, 프라그마틱 슬롯 such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and were 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 that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as 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 DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for 슬롯 L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance with respect 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 violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe 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 norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 사이트 (Gpsites.win) as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, 프라그마틱 환수율 HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.
The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.