Notes

Which Website To Research Pragmatic Online
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.


Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.

My Website: https://wikimapia.org/external_link?url=https://pragmatickr.com/