Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial Researchers from TS amp; ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof see the example 2 This article examines all local research on Korean published 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 pragmatic research It has many strengths, but it also has a few disadvantages The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations This is why it is important to analyze it carefully 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 Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal competence A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data Metapragmatic Questionnaires MQs This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, 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 DCTs and MQs They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist 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 relationship affordances These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices The data was categorized according Ishihara 2010's definition of pragmatic resistance Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you" This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied 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 showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and 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 coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior Refusal Interviews RIs The central question in pragmatic research is Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs The participants consisted 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 either in their L1 or L2 Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 of their responses They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted the local social norms They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent This is similar to that expressed by Brown 2013 and Ishihara 2009 These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul Case Studies The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject https//blogfreelynet/maleplanet94/15-astonishing-facts-about-pragmatic-slots uses various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context This case study was based on an open source platform, 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 susceptible to native models They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses This lowered the quality of their answers Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands 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 instance said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would