7 Useful Tips For Making The Best Use Of Your Pragmatic
페이지 정보
작성자 Franchesca 댓글 0건 조회 3회 작성일 24-12-23 03:01본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 individual differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.
Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged 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' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked 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 asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.
The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built 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 the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.
Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 individual differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.
Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.
In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged 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' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked 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 asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.
The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built 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 the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.
Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
