Add Pragmatic Tips From The Best In The Business

Pragmatic-Tips-From-The-Best-In-The-Business.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
+
+In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. For instance, RIs from TS and  [프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험](https://pragmatickr.com/) ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).
+
+This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:
+
+Discourse Construction Tests
+
+The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.
+
+Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.
+
+In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.
+
+A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.
+
+DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.
+
+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 traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.
+
+Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
+
+This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
+
+The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
+
+The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.
+
+The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having 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 contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.
+
+Refusal Interviews
+
+One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first 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 scenario.
+
+The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.
+
+However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
+
+These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.
+
+The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives 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 helpful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.
+
+This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.
+
+The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.
+
+The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.