5 Pragmatic Lessons Learned From Professionals
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to 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 valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. 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 choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료 and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 슬롯 (https://tupalo.com/En/users/7451549) in various contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods 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 a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.
This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to 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 valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. 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 choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료 and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 슬롯 (https://tupalo.com/En/users/7451549) in various contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods 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 a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.
This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
- 이전글Cracking The Bet Code 24.11.06
- 다음글How to do research papers 24.11.06
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.
