What Experts From The Field Want You To Know?
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including 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 required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found 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 knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 사이트 example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process 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)
The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.
This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
Moreover, 프라그마틱 사이트 the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including 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 required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found 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 knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 사이트 example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process 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)
The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.
This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.
Moreover, 프라그마틱 사이트 the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.
- 이전글국산야동 바로가기チ 감상 (full_780)국산야동 바로가기チ #all 국산야동 바로가기チ 무료 24.11.06
- 다음글비아그라 먹으먼 오래하나요 24.11.06
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.