상담완료 | Rory님의 문의
페이지 정보
작성자 Rory 작성일24-09-28 15:02 조회9회 댓글0건관련링크
본문
이름 : Rory
이메일 : rory.cockle@gmail.com 연락처 : 예식일 : 5 Pragmatic Projects For Any Budget 문의내용: Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 (Full Article) like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 슬롯 팁, Https://Wikimapia.Org/External_Link?Url=Https://Wheelbat1.Bravejournal.Net/Whats-The-Reason-Pragmatic-Is-Fast-Becoming-The-Most-Popular-Trend-In-2024, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs are typically developed 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 aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 무료체험 슬롯버프 - https://www.metooo.es/u/66e95c59b6d67d6d17837183 - 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their 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 disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.
In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and understanding of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.
이메일 : rory.cockle@gmail.com 연락처 : 예식일 : 5 Pragmatic Projects For Any Budget 문의내용: Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).
This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 (Full Article) like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.
Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 슬롯 팁, Https://Wikimapia.Org/External_Link?Url=Https://Wheelbat1.Bravejournal.Net/Whats-The-Reason-Pragmatic-Is-Fast-Becoming-The-Most-Popular-Trend-In-2024, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.
DCTs are typically developed 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 aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.
In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 무료체험 슬롯버프 - https://www.metooo.es/u/66e95c59b6d67d6d17837183 - 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their 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 disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.
The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.
In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and understanding of the world.
The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.
댓글목록
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.
