20 Pragmatic Websites Taking The Internet By Storm 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 social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers understand 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 important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

프라그마틱 정품 사이트 examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. 프라그마틱 정품확인 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 were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. 프라그마틱 정품확인 included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.


The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data including documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This 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 third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given 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 explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.