The Reasons Pragmatic Is Everyone's Passion In 2024
Francine
0
3
12.29 09:09
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. 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 can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be 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 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of 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 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 프라그마틱 무료체험 (Http://bbs.01bim.com/home.php?mod=space&uid=1345193) discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Interviews for refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, 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 choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.
CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:
Discourse Construction Tests
The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. 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 can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be 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 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of 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 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 프라그마틱 무료체험 (Http://bbs.01bim.com/home.php?mod=space&uid=1345193) discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.
Interviews for refusal
One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.
The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.
However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.
Case Studies
The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.
This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, 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 choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.
The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.
댓글 (0)
