Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example). This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. https://pragmatickr.com/ focuses on the practical important topics such as: Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs) The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment. Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts. In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech. A recent study used a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods. DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse. A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did. Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs) This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including 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 to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment. The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario. The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms. The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior. Refusal Interviews One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their 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 resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university. The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009). These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy. Case Studies The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods. In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context. This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had 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 second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness. Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.