Add 20 Pragmatic Websites That Are Taking The Internet By Storm

20-Pragmatic-Websites-That-Are-Taking-The-Internet-By-Storm.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
+
+CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).
+
+This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:
+
+Discourse Construction Tests
+
+The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and  [프라그마틱 슬롯체험](https://pragmatickr.com/) personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.
+
+Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument 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 related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.
+
+In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.
+
+A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.
+
+DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
+
+In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those 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 their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.
+
+The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.
+
+The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.
+
+The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.
+
+Interviews for refusal
+
+The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.
+
+The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.
+
+The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
+
+These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for 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 investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.
+
+In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.
+
+This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
+
+Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.
+
+The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.