What Experts In The Field Want You To Know
페이지 정보
작성자 Melaine Simos 작성일24-12-21 23:37 조회2회 댓글0건본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).
This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being 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. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major 프라그마틱 체험 슬롯 환수율 (Mysocialguides.Com) factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and 프라그마틱 게임 their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. 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 on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the 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 called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).
This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being 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. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.
Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major 프라그마틱 체험 슬롯 환수율 (Mysocialguides.Com) factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and 프라그마틱 게임 their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. 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 on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the 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 called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.