8 Tips To Enhance Your Pragmatic Game
페이지 정보
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, 프라그마틱 슬롯 as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 환수율 should include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. 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 DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs often 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 led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Interviews for refusal
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and 프라그마틱 추천 to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit 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 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.
CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, 프라그마틱 슬롯 as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the second example).
This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 환수율 should include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. 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 DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs often 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 led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Interviews for refusal
A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and 프라그마틱 추천 to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit 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 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.
The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.
This 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.
- 이전글24 Hours To Improving Treating ADD In Adults 24.10.12
- 다음글Five Tools That Everyone Who Works In The Mesothelioma Asbestos Claims Industry Should Be Making Use Of 24.10.12
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.