squashsweets2

User Name: You need to be a registered (and logged in) user to view username.

Total Articles : 0

https://elmore-deal-2.blogbright.net/why-pragmatic-is-more-difficult-than-you-think

Study of Chinese Learners Pedagogical Choices in Korean CLKs awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as the learnerinternal aspects were crucial For instance RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor see the second example This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020 It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like Discourse Construction Tests DCTs The Discourse Completion Test DCT is widely used in the field of pragmatic research It has numerous advantages but it also has its disadvantages The DCT for instance does not take into account individual and cultural variations Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody information structure and nonnative speakers Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts a major challenge in crosscultural pragmatics In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners It can be used to analyze numerous issues like politeness turntaking and lexical choices It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students refusal skills Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods such as a questionnaire or video recordings However the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind such as content and form These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers They arent always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in realworld interactions This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did Metapragmatic Questionnaires MQs This study examined Chinese learners choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks DCTs metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews RIs The participants were 46 CLKs of upperintermediate who participated in MQs DCTs and RIs They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism 라이브 카지노 were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities their ongoing life histories as well as their relationships These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants rational choices The data were categorized according to Ishiharas 2010 definition of pragmatic resistance Then the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Ztests The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as sorry or thank you This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages leading to a lack of knowledge of koreans pragmatic norms The results showed that CLKs preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations For instance in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored converging to L1 norms The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation The RIs were conducted on a onetoone basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent were then coded The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior Interviews for refusal The most important question in pragmatic research is Why do some learners decide to not accept nativespeaker norms Recent research sought to answer this question using several experiments including DCTs MQs and RIs Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations The results showed that CLKs on average did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 of their responses They did so even though they could produce nativelike patterns In addition they were conscious of their own pragmatism They attributed their decisions to learnerinternal factors such as their identities personalities and identities that are multilingual as well as ongoing life histories They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits They also discussed for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed They were concerned that their native friends would consider them foreigners and believe they are 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 as a model for official Korean proficiency tests Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 an investigational strategy that relies on participantcentered deep investigations to explore a specific subject It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings such as interviews or observations documents and artifacts This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which are best left out It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework This case study was built on an opensource platform the KMMLU Leaderboard 50 and its Koreanspecific 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 deviation from the correct pragmatic inference They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or garbage to their responses This also lowered the quality of their answers The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTCSPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness The interviewees were presented two scenarios each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality For instance TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the wellbeing of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so