Pragmatic Tips From The Top In The Business
페이지 정보
작성자 Dorothea Atwood 작성일 24-09-28 03:53 조회 3 댓글 0본문
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and 프라그마틱 게임 무료슬롯 (visit the next website page) could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as 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 think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 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 also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.
In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, 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 tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 카지노 (visit the next website page) example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).
This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:
Discourse Construction Tests
The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.
DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and 프라그마틱 게임 무료슬롯 (visit the next website page) could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as 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 think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.
The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 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 also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.
In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, 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 tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 카지노 (visit the next website page) example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.
댓글목록 0
등록된 댓글이 없습니다.
