Notes

20 Pragmatic Websites Taking The Internet By Storm
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.


A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

additional resources (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding 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 with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted 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. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea 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 an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained 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 required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.

Homepage: https://squareblogs.net/scalechick8/responsible-for-the-pragmatic-free-game-budget-10-wonderful-ways-to-spend