Pragmatic Strategies From The Top In The Industry

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 무료 - online, DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, 프라그마틱 정품인증 which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by 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 showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to 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 were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

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. Furthermore, they were clearly 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 spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.