Why Is It So Useful During COVID-19

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior 프라그마틱 게임 in communication. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety 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, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including 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 responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 정품 무료 (visit our website) DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. 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 further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.