yakair6

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

Total Articles : 0

https://canvas.instructure.com/eportfolios/3171820/Home/Slot_Explained_In_Fewer_Than_140_Characters

Study of Chinese Learners Pedagogical Choices in Korean CLKs awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learninginternal factors were significant For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor see the example 2 This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020 It focuses on the practical core topics such as Discourse Construction Tests DCTs The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research It has numerous advantages but also some disadvantages The DCT for example is unable to account for cultural and individual variations The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations As a result it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in nonnative speakers The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts which is a major issue in crosscultural pragmatics In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners behaviors in communication It can be used to examine various issues including the manner of speaking turn taking and lexical choice 프라그마틱 무료체험 can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like 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 developed using specific language requirements like the form and content These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in realworld interactions This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did Metapragmatic Questionnaires MQs This study examined Chinese learners pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested including Discourse Completion Tasks DCTs Metapragmatic Questionnaires Refusal Interviews RIs Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their identities their multilingual identities ongoing life histories and relationship advantages These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants pragmatic choices The data was classified according to Ishihara 2010s definition of pragmatic resistance Then the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and ztests The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as sorry or thank you This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms The results showed that the CLKs preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations For instance in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation The RIs were conducted on a onetoone basis within two days of participants completing the MQs The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them The code was recoded repeatedly with the coders rereading and discussing each transcript The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior Interviews for refusal The most important question in pragmatic research is Why do certain learners choose not to accept nativespeaker norms Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 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 L2 Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked 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 even though they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance They attributed their choice to learnerinternal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities They also referred external factors like relational advantages For instance they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as foreignersand consider them incompetent This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown 2013 and Ishihara 2009 These findings suggest that nativespeaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the koreas pragmatics Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul Case Studies The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive participantcentered research to study a specific subject This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews observations and documents to support its findings This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard 50 and its Koreanspecific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCCSolar figure 1 below The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts deviating from the correct pragmatic inference They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or garbage to their responses This lowered the quality of their responses The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt They were asked questions about their WTCSPCC pragmatic awareness understanding and perception of the world The interviewees were presented two scenarios each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality TS for example claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work even though she thought native Koreans would