Pragmatic Tips From The Top In The Business
Vince
2025-02-07 01:22
13
0
본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and 프라그마틱 무료체험 were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 슈가러쉬 (simply click the up coming webpage) refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as 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 for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on 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 responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.
This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.
In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).
This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.
A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and 프라그마틱 무료체험 were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 슈가러쉬 (simply click the up coming webpage) refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.
DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.
In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as 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 for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on 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 responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.
The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.
This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.
The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.
댓글목록0