20 Pragmatic Websites Taking The Internet By Storm: Difference between revisions
FriedaLoehr (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
(8 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean<br><br>In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were important. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).<br><br>This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:<br><br>Discourse Construction Tests<br><br>The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.<br><br>Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, [https://informatic.wiki/wiki/Do_Not_Buy_Into_These_Trends_Concerning_Pragmatic 프라그마틱 추천] a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.<br><br>In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.<br><br>A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.<br><br>DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.<br><br>A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and [https://www.google.ki/url?q=https://klint-steffensen.technetbloggers.de/14-cartoons-on-pragmatic-free-trial-slot-buff-which-will-brighten-your-day 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트] utilized hints less than email data.<br><br>Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)<br><br>This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.<br><br>The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.<br><br>The results of the MQs, DCTs and 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, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.<br><br>The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.<br><br>Refusal Interviews (RIs)<br><br>A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.<br><br>The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.<br><br>The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and [https://heavenarticle.com/author/cordfile28-874115/ 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작] believe they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).<br><br>These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.<br><br>Case Studies<br><br>The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.<br><br>In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and [https://www.metooo.com/u/66ea682af2059b59ef3aa978 프라그마틱 게임] ([https://www.google.co.zm/url?q=https://bonde-solomon-2.thoughtlanes.net/are-you-responsible-for-a-live-casino-budget-10-unfortunate-ways-to-spend-your-money www.google.co.zm]) which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.<br><br>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 the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.<br><br>The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.<br><br>The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and [http://gdchuanxin.com/home.php?mod=space&uid=4143797 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트] refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would. |
Latest revision as of 01:58, 27 December 2024
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were important. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 추천 a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.
DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs, DCTs and 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, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 believe they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and 프라그마틱 게임 (www.google.co.zm) which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider 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 the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.
The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.
The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.