Pragmatic Tips From The Top In The Industry
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
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, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 플레이 (Bookmarkspiral.Com) lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
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 even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 플레이 linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific 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 goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:
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, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 플레이 (Bookmarkspiral.Com) lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
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 even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 플레이 linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific 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 goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.
- 이전글9 Lessons Your Parents Teach You About Mesothelioma Compensation 24.10.13
- 다음글9 . What Your Parents Teach You About Asbestos Attorney Mesothelioma 24.10.13
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.