Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.
A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not necessarily precise, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 - menwiki.men official website - and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their 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, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 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 had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.
A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not necessarily precise, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 - menwiki.men official website - and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their 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, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 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 had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.
Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
댓글 달기