Why The Pragmatic Is Beneficial During COVID-19
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. 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 include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
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 using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed 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 the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 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 complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.
Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. 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 include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
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 using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed 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 the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 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 complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.
The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.
- 이전글10 Methods To Build Your Case Battle Empire 24.12.20
- 다음글A Case Opening Battles Success Story You'll Never Imagine 24.12.20
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.