Notes

Why Is It So Useful? In COVID-19
Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. 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 useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. 프라그마틱 무료체험 are not necessarily precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through 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 MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.


The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be 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 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their 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 on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical 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 investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, 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 highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on 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 regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.

My Website: https://pragmatickr.com/