What Experts Say You Should Know?
관련링크
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For 프라그마틱 무료게임 환수율 - king-bookmark.stream, instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT, for example, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for 무료 프라그마틱 collecting data.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.
CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For 프라그마틱 무료게임 환수율 - king-bookmark.stream, instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT, for example, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.
Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for 무료 프라그마틱 collecting data.
DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.