Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 추천 (bookmarks-hit.com) turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 이미지 based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through 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 DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with 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 experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 L2 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 추천 (bookmarks-hit.com) turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 이미지 based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through 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 DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with 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 experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 L2 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.
댓글 달기