@article{ART003388744},
author={Claudia Sangmi Yun and Yu Hyekyung},
title={Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision},
journal={The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea},
issn={1226-4822},
year={2026},
volume={34},
number={3},
pages={257-282}
TY - JOUR
AU - Claudia Sangmi Yun
AU - Yu Hyekyung
TI - Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision
JO - The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea
PY - 2026
VL - 34
IS - 3
PB - The Sociolinguistic Society Of Korea
SP - 257
EP - 282
SN - 1226-4822
AB - As generative AI becomes increasingly integrated into L2 writing instruction, a central pedagogical challenge concerns not only students’ access to AI-generated feedback but also how they formulate requests for such feedback. This study examines the metapragmatic feedback-seeking practices evident in prompts written by 131 first-year Korean university EFL students during a four-hour classroom revision task using ChatGPT (GPT-3.5). The primary dataset comprised 655 student-generated prompts, with five prompts from each participant addressing content, coherence, organization, word choice, and sentence structure. A data-driven thematic analysis first identified three mutually exclusive pragmatic gap categories: ambiguous prompts (n = 436, 66.6%), overly broad prompts (n = 163, 24.9%), and criteria-lacking prompts (n = 56, 8.5%). Cohen’s kappa (κ = .85) was calculated for this three-category classification. A second interpretive analysis then examined how the omissions characteristic of these categories left different aspects of evaluative specification and contextual inference unresolved for the generative AI system. This distribution is interpreted analytically, not as evidence of students’ intentions. Based on the recurring omissions, this study derives the Goal–Target–Criteria (GTC) heuristic post hoc. It also offers the Reflective Question Loop (RQL) as an untested pedagogical proposal for future classroom implementation, rather than as an intervention evaluated in this study. The study contributes to sociolinguistic accounts of human-AI interaction by showing how prompt wording configures evaluative authority, inferential burden, and participant roles during L2 revision.
KW - prompt literacy;metapragmatic feedback-seeking practice;generative AI-mediated L2 revision;evaluative authority;feedback literacy
DO -
UR -
ER -
Claudia Sangmi Yun and Yu Hyekyung. (2026). Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea, 34(3), 257-282.
Claudia Sangmi Yun and Yu Hyekyung. 2026, "Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision", The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea, vol.34, no.3 pp.257-282.
Claudia Sangmi Yun, Yu Hyekyung "Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision" The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 34.3 pp.257-282 (2026) : 257.
Claudia Sangmi Yun, Yu Hyekyung. Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision. 2026; 34(3), 257-282.
Claudia Sangmi Yun and Yu Hyekyung. "Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision" The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 34, no.3 (2026) : 257-282.
Claudia Sangmi Yun; Yu Hyekyung. Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea, 34(3), 257-282.
Claudia Sangmi Yun; Yu Hyekyung. Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea. 2026; 34(3) 257-282.
Claudia Sangmi Yun, Yu Hyekyung. Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision. 2026; 34(3), 257-282.
Claudia Sangmi Yun and Yu Hyekyung. "Prompt Writing as Metapragmatic Feedback-Seeking Practice in Generative AI-Mediated L2 Revision" The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 34, no.3 (2026) : 257-282.
