Teacher Training Workshop


Teaching Korean Grammar in Context:

Teaching of –myen and –ttay

Sahie Kang

Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center

      –myen and –ttay are chosen because American students often misunderstand the usages of these two grammar points.  Traditionally these two grammar points were introduced by the translations, “if  for –myen and “when/while” for –ttay.  Without any pragmatic explanation, students often become confused with their various functions and misuse one of them in the place of the other.  Obviously their functions overlap in some situations but not all the time.  Also their functions parallel their English counterparts sometimes, but not all the time.  This means that students would make errors unless different pragmatic functions of these two forms are taught.

     This workshop will offer the audience a rationale and practical ideas for teaching grammar not in isolation but in context, so students can actually communicate with native speakers by using appropriate grammar patterns in different kinds of functional situations.

To lay the groundwork for a more effective approach, the workshop will address the teaching of grammar from the perspective of adult learning theory. Then, the presenter will walk the audience through two ways of teaching: the deductive approach and inductive approach, which are given in a detailed step-by-step description below.  All tasks and related authentic materials will be provided. 

A. Deductive Way

1.The different functions of two grammar points will be explained in English first.

2.The two grammar points will be presented within a context of real language usage, i.e. conversation or passage.  Then, students practice patterns according to different pragmatic functions.

3. Students engage in real life tasks with four-skill (reading, listening, speaking, and writing) integration where all different pragmatic functions are involved.

4. Students do different role-plays in which different pragmatic functions can be used.

B. Inductive Way

1.The two grammar points will be presented within authentic writing or speaking, which includes different functions of the two grammar points.

2. Students induct the pragmatic functions of grammar points, and they come up with some pragmatic rules in their own language (English).

3. Students engage in real life tasks with four-skill integration where all different pragmatic functions are involved.

4. Students do different role-plays in which different pragmatic functions can be used.

     Decades of research have suggested that grammar taught in isolation has little, if any, effect on most students' learning for target language proficiency.  Also, at DLI, experienced students who seemingly mastered grammar points often had difficulties in using proper grammar points in proper situations, in communicating with native speakers, or in understanding them.  With the new curriculum, which has been implemented since 1997 at DLI, the method of teaching grammar in context with various grammar points has been successfully implemented and taught.  It has been well received by students because it allows students to function in real life situations, and it elevates students’ motivation level.  Rather than giving tedious grammar instruction, instructors help students to function in the target language.  Above all, the method has raised students’ speaking proficiency levels significantly for the last 4 years.


Lesson on the -umyen Construction

Soohee Kim

University of Washington

  In this workshop, I will demonstrate a teaching method I have been using in the classroom to teach non-heritage (absolute novice) learners of Korean.  I have chosen 으면 and as target constructions for two reasons.  One, their English  translation (if and when, respectively) does not always correspond to the Korean 으면 or (i.e., usage difference), and two, each of these constructions involve some idiomatic expressions that may be yet another source of confusion.  In this workshop, I will try to clarify the different use of the two constructions.  In actuality, the two constructions 으면 and should be introduced in two separate lessons as learners have trouble learning similar constructions that are introduced back to back.  Below, I present a lesson plan for the 으면 construction, which involves increasing complexity of the exercise and decreasing dependency on the teacher.  Vocabulary used in the lesson is adopted from Integrated Korean Beginning II (University of Hawai’i Press).

Introduction: Write [grammar point: 으면 = if/when] on the board. (Students should already have read this grammar explanation at home).

Basic Form Practice

(a) To familiarize students with conjugation, after introducing a few model examples, present dictionary form and have the students conjugate them in 으면 form (oral only).

Regular Verb/Adjective    C-ending: , , , , , ,

                                     V-ending: , , 마시, 예쁘, 배고프, , 비싸

                                        -ending: , ,

Irregular Verb/Adjective    -, / -, /-하얗

(b) Give a practice slip to students for simple conjugation exercise. The slip should have more regular and irregular verbs and adjectives in their citation form (written).

Context practice: After introducing a few model examples, invite students to answer the teacher’s question or complete the unfinished sentence the teacher presents.

·   배가 고프면 피자를 먹어요.

·   __________ 신발을 사세요. (Prompt students with a quiet “언제?”)

·   __________ 공부하세요.  /  __________ 주스 마시세요.

Assigning tasks: Students should be able to use the new construction in relevant situations. Hand out slips with various situations.

·   어떻게 하겠어요? Ask your partner what they would do if…

·   ex:  우산이 없는데 비가 오면 어떻게 하겠어요?

·   you haven’t taken a shower and your friend comes to your house

·   your car breaks down on the way to school

·   you have no money but you’re hungry

Closure: Ask a pair of students to demonstrate their question and answer for the rest of the class.

Assign translation homework for review practice

  • If you are cold, put on more clothes.
  • When you finish Korean 101, are you going to take Korean again next quarter?
  • When you go to Korea, call me!
  • When you finish your homework, go out and play!

으면 as a sentential subject may be introduced as an independent lesson in the future.

ex. 학기에 5과목 들으면 너무 많지 않아요?                Isn’t it too much to take 5 classes per quarter?

The lesson has a similar structure; in the lesson, which should come after, emphasis should be placed on involving a more general time frame, whereas 으면 involves specific and individualized incidents. 머리가 아플 보통 무슨 먹어요?  vs. 머리가 아프면 드세요.





Young-Geun Lee

Dept of East Asian Languages & Literatures

University of Hawaii at Manoa


      In this paper, I will present ‘Focus on form’ as a methodological principle that I would employ in teaching relative clauses in L2 Korean. Since a sizable number of studies have already been conducted with a wide range of topics from what focus on form is, to how it differs from focus on forms and focus on meaning, and to how it can be realized in various contexts (see, e.g., Doughty & Varella, 1998; Doughty & Williams, 1998a, b, c; Long, 1991, 1998; Long & Robinson, 1998), suffice here to state what Doughty & Varella (1998, p. 115) provided three specific criteria for implicit focus on form task development:

1.       The target of the focus on form should arise incidentally in the otherwise content-based lesson.

2.       The primary or “overriding” focus should remain on meaning or communication.  

3.       The teacher should draw students’ attention to form rather than leaving it to chance that students will notice linguistic features without any pedagogic assistance.

It should be noted then that (1) the target forms, i.e., relative clauses, should arise incidentally in the context of communication; (2) students should be developmentally ready to learn relative clauses; and (3) a teacher should notice students making errors that are systematic, pervasive and remediable. In addition, whenever errors are made, appropriate types of pedagogical interventions, e.g., recast, are to be made to draw students’ attention to the relative clause in question. Assuming these conditions are met, we could design some tasks in which use of the relative clause is required to complete the task. Here, I will focus only on the modifier ‘V + -nun’, which is the present tense for verbs. The other forms of relative clauses can also be dealt with in similar ways.

To illustrate, students are grouped in pairs and each member of the pair is given the same picture of a group of people, but only half of the people’s names are given in one picture and the other half in the other. Students are required to find out the missing names by asking each other, e.g., “Who is the person riding a bicycle?” or “The person who wears glasses is Mrs. Steve.” In doing so, they are called upon using the target form, i.e., relative clause. Teacher may demonstrate with one representative student before they begin.

During the activity, the teacher may move around the room, and whenever a student or students make(s) an error in relative clauses, the teacher can employ various types of focus on form techniques, e.g., repeating the error with rising intonation to draw students’ attention to the form (focused recast) or requesting clarification, e.g., “the person who …?” or ., simply providing the correct form without interrupting interaction (recast), or briefly interrupting the communication and then writing the rules on the board to draw the students’ attention.

Similarly, students can bring their family photo and describe the people in the picture. The activities described above can be preceded by listening tasks during which students are asked to identify the people who are doing different activities in the picture. There are, of course, other types of focus on form we can use. For instance, in reading materials, all the relative clauses can be highlighted or underlined or bold-typed (input enhancement) to make them more salient.

(i) Years of teaching Korean:            15 years

(ii) Relative clauses in L2 Korean are among the most difficult, yet essential, areas to cover in the Korean language pedagogy.  

(iii) Recently, the benefits of ‘focus on form’, which connects grammatical form to meaning during primarily communicative tasks, has been widely known in classroom second language acquisition research (see, e.g., Doughty and Williams, 1998c).

Here are the step-by-step procedures for FonF I will be taking during the demonstration:

Describing a person or a thing among many others in a picture.

Note: 1. The entire lessons will take more than a couple of days.

          2. Various types of FonF techniques are given in *italics* (Italics cannot be displayed here,  so ** before and after the word are used.)

Step 1

Teacher explains that today's lesson is on how to describe a person among many others.

Teacher then tells students to listen carefully to the three sample narratives, tape-recorded

by NSs explaining pictures of their family members or friends. Play the tape through twice. The point is to help students to get feel, but not to understand everything.

Step 2

Teacher displays a series of three simple pictures on the OHP, one at a time. The teacher then reads out picture descriptions fragments, e.g., 4 for each picture, twice each at first, and students guess who or what the person or the thing is (*Input flood*).

The teacher then repeats that description twice stressing the relative clause in question and pointing his/her finger on the OHP or using gestures. This is to draw students' attention to the target form (*Input enhancement*).

Sample items (bold type in ^stress^):

1. Ankyeng.ul ^ssun^ salam.i ce tongsayng.i.yey.yo (among 4 people).

2. Chayksang.wuy.ey ^iss.nun^ wusan.i ce wusan.i.yey.yo (among 4 things).

Step 3

Teacher displays a series of three new simple pictures on the OHP, one at a time. Same

procedures as for Step 2, except that this time, after each one, the teacher will ask the class,

gradually shifting to individual students, a question after each one, e.g., Who is Minji?

Step 4

Divide the students into a pair. Each member of the pair is given a copy of one version of the

picture, which has 4 names out of 8 people plus the descriptions of the 4 people. One of the

pair then reads out the description of one person, while the other member identifies it in the his/her version of the same picture, which does not have the person's name on it. Then reverse the giver and receiver roles for the second item, and so on. In the written description, all of the relativizers are printed in bold types (*Input enhancement* in written mode). The teacher demonstrates the procedure first with one of the students.

Students do the same thing with the different picture, except that this time, there is no description printed in the picture. So, they have to describe 4 people in the picture while the other member of each pair identifies the pictures. Tell students to ask the other member comprehension questions or confirmation checks whenever necessary, e.g., 'ankyeng ssun salam.i.yo?' During the pair activity, the teacher moves around the room and monitors students.

Whenever (a) student(s) make(s) an error on the relativization, the teacher treats the error through different types of negative feedback depending on the context, which might include: (1) giving the correct forms, i.e., relative clause, with or without stress without interrupting the interaction between students ((*Focused*) *Recast*), (2) drawing the student's attention to the target form either by asking, ?'nwugwuyo?' or by simply repeating the error, e.g., 'moca.lul sse..?', or (3) briefly interrupting the class and writing/explaining the rule of relativization on the board. The point is that whenever (a) student(s) make(s) an error, the teacher draws his/her/their attention to the target form by providing negative feedback, implicit or explicit, on the individual basis or as a whole class.

Step 5

Students are told to bring to class their family or friends picture and describe the people or the things in the picture, one by one.


Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In D. C. & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114-38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998a). Issues and terminology. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 1-11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998b). Pedagogical choices in focus in form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197-261). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (1998c). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. P. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign Language Research in Cross-Cultural Perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Long, M. H. (1998). Focus on form in task-based language teaching, University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL . Honolulu.

Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Vocabulary-building Activities

Bo Y. Park

Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center

Through interaction with participants, the presenter will demonstrate four Sino-Korean vocabulary activities for American students who are learning Korean. These activities are designed to be beneficial for students’ long-term memory and improving students’ performance in practical situation.

The first activity is to write the English meanings of ten two-syllable Sino-Korean words written in Korean, related to military, after knowing the meaning of one Sino-Korean syllable, which denotes “military.” The students will be given the meanings of the ten secondary Sino-Korean syllables.

The second activities is to write the English meanings of ten two-syllable Sino-Korean words written in Korean, related to electricity, after knowing the meaning of one Sino-Korean syllable, which indicates “electricity.”  The students will be given the meanings of the ten secondary Sino-Korean syllables as in the first activity.

After each of the two above-mentioned activities, the presenter will demonstrate how the knowledge gained through the activity is useful, using the authentic materials (Korean newspaper and magazine articles.)

The third activity is the reverse of the first and second activities. The purpose of this activity is to write the meanings of ten English words in Korean after looking at the meanings of seven individual Sino-Korean syllables. The seven Sino-Korean syllables are written in Korean followed Chinese characters in parentheses.

The fourth activity is a variation of the second activity. It is to write the English meanings of the ten two-syllable Sino-Korean words, which have secondary syllables that do not mean electricity, blacked out. Students are supposed to write the meanings of the ten Sino-Korean words after knowing the meaning of the one primary Sino-Korean syllable and those of the ten secondary Sino-Korean syllables.

This session will contribute to the field of teaching Korean as follows:

First, it will present the importance of vocabulary activities, based on morphological analysis, which illuminate the meaning of the Sino-Korean vocabulary. Second, it will lead participants to gain a hands-on knowledge of how to do the analysis and how to increase the students’ knowledge of the Sino-Korean words through vocabulary activities in context.


Workshop Demonstration – Teaching of Specific Grammar Points

Craig Merrill

UCLA/Los Angeles Unified School District

I have been teaching Korean in the Los Angeles Unified School District for twelve years.  I have taught Korean in a modified bilingual program, a pullout program, and in the Korean/English Dual Language Program.  I have taught using a variety of techniques including grammar based, content based, communicative, and natural approaches.  I have used these techniques individually and in combination with one another.

My experience and research in the area of language education indicates that an eclectic approach in the classroom has greater potential for success.  Language learners are able to integrate knowledge and information to varying degrees in a variety of different ways.  Some will develop language proficiency through kinesthetic and sensory activities, some through auditory experience, and others perhaps through the purely theoretical.  Meeting the needs of all these students requires use of multiple techniques.

The presentation will demonstrate the teaching of specific grammar points, namely the appropriate uses of kata and ota in Korean.  The teaching of kata and ota will entail instruction utilizing the various modalities, individually and in conjunction with each other.  The entirety of the presentation stresses the absolute importance of a multi-faceted approach and how such an approach can be applied to the teaching of a specific grammatical point.

The presentation will begin with a description of the presenter’s background, the importance of addressing multiple modalities, and a brief introduction of each of the modalities, properly defining its role and application in language acquisition.  The definition of the terms will be followed by concrete instructional examples as described in the following outline.  The order of the presentation generally conforms to that occurring in the Korean/English Dual Language Program, and for that matter, in most dual language programs.  The presentation will also demonstrate how instruction to each of the modalities reinforces instruction in other areas as well.


II.                 Introduction

B.     Personal background

C.     Importance of addressing multiple modalities

D.     Definition of Terms

III.               Demonstration

B.     Aural

Structured activities to provide various listening activities.

C.     Oral

Structured activities to support speech production with the teacher, other students, singing songs, etc.

D.     Visual

Visual activities include viewing of movies, diagrams, overhead, posters

E.      Kinesthetic

Using motion to reinforce learning

F.      Tactile

Use of model representations to facilitate conceptualization

G.     Grammar Based

Utilizing linguistic descriptions, grammaticalization, and techniques such as conversation analysis.

IV.              Conclusion

B.     Approaches A through F have been used successfully in dual language and language immersion programs successfully for the past 20 years.  This is supported by researchers such as Collier, Thomas, Cummins, Genesee, and Krashen

C.     Recently, Cummins (1999) proposed a grammar-based methodology be added to supplement the multi-faceted approach already in use in such programs.

D.     The suggestion that a grammar-based component be included supports the notion that learning does in fact take place under a variety of conditions.




Developing a business Korean course based on a systematic approach

Andrew Sangpil Byon

The University of Michigan at Ann Arbor

The topic of this research is related to ‘new development in curriculum designing and its applicability to Korean.’ The generally accepted view regarding ‘second & foreign language curriculum development’ includes diagnosis of needs, formulation of objectives, material (selection of content / organization of content), teaching (selection and organization of learning experiences/ supporting teachers), and evaluation. However, in reality, the number of second or foreign language programs, which has been planned, constructed, and implemented, following the principles of the curriculum designing faithfully, may be considerably rare. Because of many external factors such as political, administrative, financial and human resources issues, developing so called ‘an ideally constructed language curriculum based on the principles’ (a language program in general and a certain language course in particular) may be extremely difficult to realize. This may be particularly true for Korean language programs in the US, where a majority of the programs has been small-sized, lacking the number of properly trained teachers and administrators, and vulnerable to fund availability and student enrollment.

  However, I assert that the sound theoretical and practical knowledge of second / foreign language curriculum development is a crucial part of KFL (Korean as a foreign language) teacher education because facing the bitter reality, and preparing oneself as a professional KFL educator for the future are two separate things. KFL teachers must have sound knowledge regarding the language curriculum development, so that they can be ready to apply the knowledge when the time comes. Moreover, the knowledge may provide indispensable tools to evaluate and to appreciate any existing language programs based on theoretically grounded perspectives.

  The goal of this research paper is to discuss the entire process of planning, designing, and developing a LSP (language for specific purpose) course: business Korean, applying the theoretical and practical knowledge of systematic second language curriculum development (Brown 1995), and the aspects of National Standards (1996) in the process. In the paper, I discuss the topics as if I write an informal proposal, in which I describe each step involved in the development of the business Korean language course.

  It is hoped that the research paper will contribute to the Korean language education field, presenting one possible model, where a LSP course in Korean is planned, designed and constructed based on the principled systematic approach of curriculum development.


Increasing Korean Oral Fluency Using an Electronic Bulletin Board and Wimba-Based Voice Chat


Sunah Park Cho and Stephen Carey

University of British Columbia

e-mail: sunah@interchange.ubc.ca

  For the last three years, the University of British Columbia (UBC)'s Korean program has received funding from UBC's Teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund (TLEF) to develop web sites for six Korean language courses: Korean 102, 104, 200, 300, 410 and 415, which cover the beginning to advanced levels.  These sites have been developed using WebCT, a web course authoring program developed at UBC five years ago, and now one of the leading tools for delivering course content on the web. The web sites incorporate audio and video components and have as their primary goals the enhancement of interaction between students and instructor and the increasing of Korean language input and opportunities for self-guided practice for the student.

The websites for Korean 102, 104, 200, 300 also incorporate an asynchronous Bulletin Board and an asynchronous voice forum called Wimba.  The Bulletin Board is a threaded discussion forum that allows students to participate in discreet course-related topics any time from any place.  Wimba is the first program developed to create voice message boards.  It uses a free-to-install Java Applet, which runs in Internet Explorer, Netscape and AOL browsers.  A user can hear messages and record his or her own voice at any time.

This paper will analyze the discourse of the Bulletin Board to demonstrate improvement in students' reading and writing skills, and show how UBC's Korean courses and associated websites use Wimba to improve students' listening and speaking skills.

Based on a detailed questionnaire that was administered to all students and a complete analysis of the Bulletin Board postings, the authors can demonstrate the following benefits to students from participation in the WebCT Bulletin Board

        1) Computer Literacy (Internet Access)

        2) Activity-based Discourse (Building Reading and Writing Skills)

        3) Collaborative Learning (Building a Sense of Community).

The benefits gained from using Wimba-based voice chat in the course websites can be summarized as follows:

        1) Convenience

        2) Increased Accuracy and Fluency in Listening and Speaking

        3) Relief From Oral Exam Anxiety

In particular, this paper focuses on the progress of students in Korean 104, a course taught directly by the author over the past two semesters.  This paper seeks to illustrate how language teachers can apply and implement technology as a supplement to in-class course work in order to help students learn more effectively the target language and course content.


  Interactive Online Exercises: Retention of Non-heritage Learners in a Mixed Class

  Hye-Won Choi and Sunghee Koh

 SUNY at Buffalo

  One of the most difficult and tenacious problems in the Korean language pedagogy is to have a mixed group of students in a single class, often divided into heritage versus non-heritage students who differ significantly in their prior knowledge and backgrounds. Unfortunately, the gap between these two groups cannot easily be narrowed even with several hours of extra office-hour sessions. Although it is ideal to offer separate sections for these different groups of students, the reality does not always allow it, especially in a small program like Korean. This paper is a preliminary report that shows that interactive online exercises can be an effective tool to help alleviate this persistent challenge.

            Interactive online exercises have two distinct features from traditional paper-and-pencil exercises: they are ‘interactive’ and available ‘online’. They are interactive in that their answers are automatically corrected (possibly with explanations) on the spot: students need not wait till the teacher corrects and returns them back. They are available online so that students can practice repeatedly at the time and place of their choice without any pressure or intimidation from their peers or the teacher, which non-heritage students are often faced with in a classroom environment. In other words, interactive online exercises can provide both anonymity and continuing feedback to those who need additional help and encouragement.

            We have developed 125 online exercises based on the textbooks for the four first- and second-year courses (KOR101, 102, 201, 202). The exercises are listed on the online syllabus for each course along with the course schedule so that students know which exercises to do and when to do them. The exercises are also cross-listed according to the type, i.e., 1) new words and expressions, 2) grammar/pattern drills, 3) conversation drills, and 4) reading comprehension. So, a student of 201, for example, can visit the grammar drill section and practice an old piece of grammar (e.g., subject particles) that she/he learned in 101.  

We started having these exercises available in Fall 2000 and recommended, but not required, the students to do them as addition sources of practice. Then we kept a close track of the online activities by the students of 201. KOR201 has traditionally been a critical course to non-heritage learners where the number of them drops drastically (approximately 30-40% to 15% in 2000) and even the survivors have a very difficult time.

 # of students (total of 20)






 # of exercises (total of 29)






To summarize the result, which was shown in the table above, 60% of the registered students did the exercises regularly, namely, at least once per lesson. Interestingly, the top 15% who did the most of the exercises (80% of them) were all non-heritage students. Through personal communications, they all reported that these online exercises were highly helpful in improving their language skills, getting them better scores in the tests and hence better grades in class, and most of all, building self-confidence. Also, they are fun to do.

Of course, this result is only preliminary, based on a one-semester observation. However, it shows a strong potential of the online exercises as a supplementary tool and material to the classroom activities that have limitations in equally serving different groups of learners. Another advantage of the online exercises is that they can easily be coupled by audio files, which then can provide a crucial assistance to non-heritage learners, who usually fall behind in their listening skills.


  Recognition and retention of English loanwords by Korean learners


InJung Cho

Monash University

  English speaking learners of European languages can easily learn the vocabulary of the target languages using cognate words and loanwords between mother tongues and target languages (Webber 1978; Banta 1981; Howlett 1979; de Groot & Keizer 2000).  

Like other languages, the Korean language has adopted many words from English, and the number of the loanwords has greatly increased as a result of accelerated global communication in the Internet era. English loanwords in Korean have the potential of helping English speaking learners to quickly expand the size of their Korean vocabulary. That is, native knowledge of English can give learners a built-in lexicon of many of the high frequency words in Korean such as 버스(bus), 아이스크림(ice cream), 커피(coffee), 뉴스(news), 세미나(seminar), 리포트(report), 스커트(skirt).

  However, learners of the Korean language do not seem to take advantage of these loanwords since Hangul, the Korean writing system, is completely different from the English alphabet. That is, English loanwords in Korean do not appear in written form as loanwords to English speaking learners. As a result, these learners have difficulties in activating their top-down strategies in dealing with the loanwords.

  The purpose of this paper is to examine ways of helping English speaking learners to activate the top-down processing strategies. To this end, a couple of experiments have been conducted that featured the use of different text fonts for loanwords. The results show that it is possible to activate top-down processing with this relatively simple method and that the size of learners' vocabulary can be significantly expanded.

  Based on the results, this paper proposes that:

(1) learners should be encouraged to employ more effective ways to improve their acquisition of Korean vocabulary by using the loanwords and;

(2) Korean learning materials should employ a different font for loanwords.




Culture in Language vs. Language in Culture


Sungdai Cho

SUNY at Binghamton


  This paper shows how to teach culture in the language class, paying a special attention to the language that we should use for the explanation of a culture.  Since the inception of foreign language guideline by ACTFL, culture becomes more important in the language teaching.  It will show, first how to define culture relating to the language instruction and classify it into four different categories, depending on the level of difficulty in the language instruction.  Secondly, I will show how effectively we should teach cultures in different levels of the language instruction.  Finally, the summary and conclusion will follow with a future direction of culture teaching.


Atkins, D.  2000.  TESOL and Culture.  TESOL Quarterly 33:625-654.

Brown, H.  1994.  Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy.  Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Cho, Sungdai.  2001.  Korean Language in Culture and Society.  In Ho-min Sohn (eds.).  Chapter 4. Salient Features of Korean.  University of Hawaii Press.

Jordan, Eleanor H. and A. Ronald Walton.  1987.  “Truly Foreign Language: Instructional Challenges”  PP 110-124.  Richard Lambert ed. The Annals of the American Academy of political and Social Science: Foreign Language  a National Agenda.  Sage Publications: Beverly Hills, CA.

Hammerly, Hector.  1982.  Synthesis in Second Language Learning.  Second Language Publication: Blaine, Washington.

Holliday, A.  1994.  Appropriate Methodology in Social Context.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hinkel, E.  1999.  Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning.  New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.

Kubota, R.  1999.  Japanese Culture Constructed by Discourses: Implication for Applied Linguistics research and ELT.  TESOL Quarterly 33:9-35.

Seelye, H. Ned.  1985  Teaching Culture.  Lincolnwood, Illinois.  National Textbook Company.

Walker, Galal.  1989.  “The Less Commonly Taught Languages in the Context of American Pedagogy.”  Helen Lepke ed. Shaping the Future: Challenges and Opportunities.  Middlebury: Northeast Conference.

Walker, Galal.  2000.  Performed Culture: Learning to Participate in Another Culture.  in Richard D. Lambert and Elana Shohamy (eds), Language Policy and pedagogy, John Benjamins: Philadelphia.

Walker, Galal and Scott McGinnis.  1995.  Learning Less Commonly Taught Languages: An Agreement on the Bases for the Training of Teachers.  Columbus, OH: OSU Foreign Language Publications.



Teaching  Sound Symbolism in Korean Classes

Young-mee Yu Cho

Rutgers University

  All languages have onomatopoetic words which represent the sounds made by animals and other objects.  Some examples in English include  ‘cuckoo,’ ‘oink,’ ‘arf,’ ‘meow,’ ‘buzz’, ‘thump’ and ‘bang.’  These words imitate, in varying degrees, natural sounds made by a bird, a pig, a cat, a bee, a fist and a gun. Sound symbolism also includes visual and other perceptual images. For instance, English words beginning with ‘gl’ such as ‘glitter’, ‘glow’, ‘gleam’ share a common meaning that has something to do with light while a number of words that start with ‘sw’ suggest  smooth and wide movements (‘swarm’, ‘swerve’, ‘swoop’, ‘sway’, ‘swing’, ‘swivel’, ‘swagger’, etc.)   In addition, final consonants of a word tend to contribute to the meaning; some words that end with p, t and k express the motion being abruptly stopped (‘bunt’ ‘punt’ ‘crack,’ ‘thunk,’ ‘pop,’ and ‘thump’).

English does not manifest a systematic pattern of sound symbolism.  Sound symbolism in a language, however, often goes beyond the onomatopoetic and extends to words that denote subjective impressions of smell, taste, color, size, mood, movement, shape and other perceptual and psychological experiences, and even to  what Martin calls, “the looks, or the feel of a situation’ (Martin 1992, 340).  Korean, along with Japanese, has one of the most extensive systems of sound-symbolism, also known as the mimetic vocabulary.  The mimetic vocabulary of Korean consists of several thousand sound-imitating (UUisOngO’) and manner-symbolic (‘Uit’aeO’) words.  Sound-imitating words are more obvious than manner-symbolic words, but there are examples of the latter category in English as well.  The word, ‘twinkle twinkle’ is not a sound-imitating word, but  it expresses a way  light shines.  The Korean mimetic vocabulary is remarkable not only in its quantity but also in the way in which it occupies the integral part of the grammar.  One of the most prominent features of the Korean language is the relationship between mimetic words in terms of various word-formation.  In particular, the changes in consonants and vowels are systematically related to meaning differences. Three types will be discussed here: 1) changes of initial consonants (ping, pping, and p’ing), 2) changes of vowels (hoho and haha), and finally 3) the meanings associated with the final consonant (ping vs. pik).   The use of sound symbolism, especially in poetry and songs is extremely common and effective.

Once we understand Sound Symbolism as an essential characteristic of the Korean language, the logical next step would be searching for effective ways to teach the concept and its uses in language, literature or culture classes.  Several concrete exercises will be shown that explore the arbitrariness of sound symbolism across languages, the universal vs. language-particular dimensions of mimetics and the indispensable role it plays in Korean  poetry and songs.


  Integrating Literature into the Language Curriculum  

Ann Y. Choi

Rutgers University

            There are sound reasons for incorporating Korean literature into a college or university language curriculum:  it allows the students to appreciate the fact that the language they are learning can be used creatively for supracommunication purposes;  it can also be a breath of fresh air to liven up the straight regimen of building grammar, vocabulary, and dialogue memorization. It also provides a natural opportunity for discussions in classes often focusing on drills.  For the students it becomes reading for both comprehension and enjoyment of their own faculty to enjoy the language in unexpected ways.  The difficulty of introducing Korean literature into a language classroom appears to stem from the difficulty of the students, especially at the elementary and the intermediate level, to grasp the complexities within a given literary work which may not be commensurate with their experience in the language learning process.  Even with the aid of the instructor’s careful selection or subtitles, the various aspects of culture and history manifested by a given poem, story, or film  can intimidate or bore the unprepared student, disengaging him/her from a possibly valuable experience.   Of course, there are also the independent variables, such as different levels of literariness the students come to class with as well as their differing levels of exposure to literature in general.

            So how can the instructor, who need not be a literature specialist, intervene to make the connection between literary text and language student possible?  My paper begins with some examples of mock failures (much of it drawn from actual in-class experiences) to point out how good intentions do not necessarily yield good results, making cases for each of the three genres:  poetry, fiction, and film.  Then, suggestions as to how the undesirable outcome, again, boredom and/or intimidation, can be avoided by cushioning the literary lesson via thoughtful attention to connecting the text to the student will be made.  These prescriptions will bring to light some of the questions the instructor is likely to raise:  at which level to introduce what type of literary work, what can be assumed and not be assumed about the students’ ability to receive these works, and how to give room for the students to come to their own interpretations of the works without overintervention on the part of the instructor eager for the student to “get” the work.  Because literature does not demand a single correct answer, this last question will provoke resolutions which might contrast from methods used to teach grammar, vocabulary or spelling.

            The final part of the paper will focus on teaching literature at advanced levels of language. This will be a way of thinking about my own preparation for teaching a fourth year language course which will incorporate much literature.  This is a scenario which would offer a great modicum of freedom to choose a variety of works; how to organize such a class without a formal textbook will be the center issue and questions such as the degree of grammar to be taught and how to apportion writing, reading, and speaking at the upper levels will be addressed.  This type of course would be a bridge between language and literature courses;  the paper will end with the window into the question on how one might design literature courses in the original, as language instructors are often asked to teach other types of courses.


Colonial Censorship and Teaching of Modern Korean Literary Texts

  Kyeong-Hee Choi

The University of Chicago

  Richard Mitchell writes in his book Censorship in Imperial Japan (1983): "No study of imperial Japan is complete that does not take into account the ubiquitous censor. The right of written communication with the public was one privilege which the government was inclined to treat as its private property, granting and rescinding freedom of expression." As a student of modern Korean literature, whose emergence and growth approximately coincide with the rise and strengthening of the Japanese empire, I will have to make a similar claim: that no study of literature of colonial Korea is proper that does not take into account the ubiquitous censor. Indeed, the censor had more power and thorough control over freedom of expression in the colony than in the imperial metropolis if for no other reason than the relatively small number of publications coming out of the peninsula. The destruction and disappearance of the original texts and related censorial documents as well as various post-liberation situations that did not promote the restoration of the censored portions pose a serious impediment to the study of modern Korean literature with regard to the impact of colonial censorship upon literary production and texts. This cluster of problems facing the study of literature bears a derivative impact upon the ways in which this modern/colonial literature is taught in a non-Korean context of learning, in which the extra-textual or background information often crucial to understanding of a literary text is always already lacking.

  This paper addresses the need to reckon the impact of colonial censorship upon modern Korean literary production with a view to devising teaching strategies that not only help students understand the hidden, displaced, and often amputated layers of meaning of a censored text but also cultivate a textual and linguistic sensitivity among students, a general sensitivity that is historically grounded and culturally tuned and plays a crucial role in learning Korean language and literature. The paper revisits actual traces of various kinds of censorship in modern Korean literary texts and demonstrates different textual strategies deployed by writers as preventive measures against censorship. In doing so, it explores the techniques of reading and teaching that will be useful to a teacher of Korean language and literature who introduces modern Korean literary texts to a class.


Reflective Journal Writing in the Korean II Class

Hye Young Chung

University of Southern California


Language teaching is consisted of four sections: listening, reading, speaking, and writing. However, writing is often less emphasized especially for lower level students, due to the fact that students are not comfortable to write in Korean yet, or an instructor is not confident to evaluate beginner students’ writings in Korean.

With the use of journal writing, students can relate personal experiences to the Korean class, react and interpret, and record their thoughts and information in Korean. Students mostly write about events in their own lives and other topics of special interest in the journals, and they write to share with the teacher or classmates. Teachers respond as interested readers, often asking questions and offering comments about their writings. Those comments range from the correction of grammatical points to the interaction or reflection of students’ writings, based on the instructor’s emphasis of the class.

While I taught Korean II class at Univ. of Southern California about for five years, I have used the reflective journal writing for three semesters. Students turned in their journals written in Korean on a weekly basis, and I commented on students’ writings each time in Korean throughout the semester. Students could write on topic related to textbook materials or personal interests. Students showed difficulty in writing and seemed uncomfortable at first because they had never been asked to write in Korean before. However, students felt more comfortable as time passed and enjoyed their accomplishment in Korean.

The interactive and reflective journal writing helps to improve beginner students’ writing competency in Korean, and to enhance positive attitude and confidence toward writing in Korean. It also helps for an instructor to understand the areas that students need improvement in. In addition, the journal writing helps to build a bond between a student and a teacher in class.

In this paper, I will present 10 practical guidelines for an instructor who intends to implement and evaluate students’ writing in Korean (e.g., Do not correct all mistakes but limit to 3-5 grammatical aspects at a time; Make the writing task meaningful to students; and Be aware of various language skills: structure skills, spelling and punctuation skills, language skills, etc.). I will also give some considerations to practice the journal writing in class (e.g., The time it takes for an instructor to respond to a student’s writing; and Evaluation criteria: checklist, scoring rubric, score, or just comments?). Through this presentation with real students’ writing samples, instructors who want to integrate the reflective journal wiring to their lower level Korean classes will have an overall view of journal writing, expectations, and practical considerations.


English speaking students’ Written Language Development in Korean

in a Korean/English Two-Way Immersion Program

Joung Hoon Ha

Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center

        Two-Way bilingual immersion integrates students from two distinct language backgrounds.  This program allows students to develop proficiency in a second language and culture while achieving the objectives of the elementary school curriculum.

      This study examines the written language development of Korean of English speaking elementary students in a Korean/English Two-Way bilingual immersion program.  Korean writings from English-speaking students’ portfolio were analyzed with respect of MLU, T-unit, and morpheme numbers.  The written language in Korean was assessed with MLU development and the increase of morpheme numbers.  Korean speaking students’ writings were also collected, analyzed, and assessed in the same way.  Korean language development of English speaking students was compared with that of Korean speaking students in this program.  The findings show that English-speaking students in this program developed their Korean language in writing which is comparable to that of Korean speaking students. 

      The implications of this study provides further evidence of the support the feasibility of Korean/English two-way immersion program for English speakers as a form of second language education. 


Segmented Assimilation and Korean Language Education


Jiha Hwang

Harvard University


Since the late 1980s, the new paradigms, i. e. segmented assimilation, transnationalism, and second language decline, have been developed in order to have a more accurate grasp of the essence of racial minority groups. These new paradigms, in general, lay stress on the importance of both maintaining ethnic language ability and cultural ethnic solidarity in order for racial minority groups to be socially and economically successful in U. S. A.. For language teachers, this stresses how important it is to integrate cultural factors into language curriculum, as cultural attachment to one's own racial group as well as linguistic attachment is crucial for the members of racial minority group to maintain ethnic solidarity. Also, culture is acquired, socially transmitted, and communicated in large part by language after all. 

                In the case of Korean Americans, however, several recent studies show that the idea of assimilation and acculturation, which are no longer paradigms explaining the characteristics 

of racial minority groups, is still dominant idea in the mindset of Korean American, and, in general, they tend to have negative attitudes toward Korean culture and society. This actually creates a relatively inactive Korean language learning environment and results in the marginalization of learning Korean language as merely a utilitarian medium  Moreover, cultural factors which are vital to learning and understanding Korean are often omitted from language instruction.  

                This paper which analyzes and interprets the data concerning ethnic language backgrounds and the ethnic language learning experiences of 63 Korean-American Harvard university students closely examines the degree of linguistic and cultural attachment of Korean Americans, and how well or poorly the existing textbooks integrate culture into their language instruction. As for the conclusion, this paper proposes some ideas and examples of how to integrate cultural factors into the language curriculum, and also suggests the way how we may improve Korean Americans' general conception and attitude toward Korean language and culture. 


Segmented Assimilation and Korean Language Education [Synopsis] 


The Myth of Assimilation 

    Belonging to neither culture (Gardner and Lambert, 1972) 

    Asian Americans: A Model Minority (Newsweek, 12/06/1982) 

    Newsweek notes that Asian Americans are often worried that they  may be regarded as forever

foreign. (Nakayama, 1989)   

    Asian-Americans are still treated as illegitimate Americans…….(Chin,1994) 

    Assimilation was for “white only"; for racially excluded groups and “colonized" minorities, it was fundamentally impossible.  

New Paradigm - Segmented Assimilation  

  Transnationalism: They[ethnic minorities].are increasingly active politically, socially,  and economically in two or more societies at the same time.(Joel Perlmann,1988) 

    Segmented Assimilation: [T]he children of immigrants will refuse to “become American" and stay

tied to their  parents' ethnic community. This might lead to  better economic outcomes, but less

assimilation. (Gans, 1992)  

  These sense of a common Asian cultural background was explicitly constructed  in opposition to white dominant US culture. In other words, the second  generation worked to create the boundaries of 'Asian-ness' by distinguishing it from that of a homogeneously conceived whit 'mainstream' US culture.(Kibria, 1997) 


Linguistic and Cultural Attachment of Korean Americans to their own ethnic group 

    Assimilation and acculturation still dominates over transnationalism      

    General conception about Korean Culture by Korean American  

                Closed vs. Opened / Hierarchical vs. egalitarian (Hwang, 1998) 

               Low level of cultural ethnic attachment (Hong and Min, 1999) 

    Increasing criticism on Korean, Korean Society, and Korean people  

    Quantitative analysis of the data which were elicited from 64 Harvard University students through questionnaire concerning ethic language use,  ethnic language experience, and the reasons for taking Korean  


Helping Salmons to return - Language and Culture Integration  

    Factors affecting the level of biculturalism are similar to the ones of  language maintenance and language shift (cf. Schumann,1978) 

    Changing ‘Language-first, culture-later’ approach  

        Culture is acquired, socially transmitted, and communicated in large part by language.(Grosjean,


               Culture as the best in human life / culture as everything in human life (Brooks,1975) 

    Diversifying Instructional strategies  

         Not teaching but Exposing learners to their heritage language and culture 

    Cross-cultural and comparative perspective upon Korean Culture 

    Cultural difference instead of cultural Ethnic superiority  

    Culture as the best vs. culture as everything in human life (Brooks,1975) 

    How to integrate language and culture into curriculum Design 

   Workshops for Korean teachers and parent 



The Degree of L1 Interference among Heritage and Non-heritage Learners of Korean: Do Heritage Students Have Advantages over Non-heritage Students?

Jung-Tae Kim

Washington University

E-mail: jkim@artsci.wustl.edu

One of the general beliefs among teachers and students in Korean language classes is that heritage students usually have advantages over non-heritage students in the target language learning.  However, few studies have been conducted to confirm or disconfirm this belief with respect to different aspects of the language and different factors that affect language learning.  The present study compared the degree of negative L1 transfer shown by the heritage learners of Korean with those shown by the non-heritage learners of Korean to find out whether the heritage learners have advantages over non-heritage learners in overcoming the interference from their first language (English). Two grammar structures were selected in order to see the possible transfer effects from L1 English to L2 Korean -- the null-subject and wh-in-situ constructions: subject pronouns are usually dropped in Korean whenever they are recoverable from the context while the overt sentence subject is an obligatory part of the sentence in English (null subject parameter); a wh-phrase remains in-situ position in Korean wh-questions while it undergoes the obligatory overt wh-movement to the sentence initial position in English wh-questions (wh-movement parameter).  Five heritage students and four non-heritage students in the first-year Korean language class at Washington University in St. Louis participated in various written-production tasks designed to elicit wh-questions and declarative sentences for which use of the null-subject are appropriate. The results showed that 1) both heritage and non-heritage students used null subject sentences at a very high rate in their Korean production (79% overall); 2) there was no significant difference between the two groups' production of null-subject sentences; 3) both groups predominantly employed the wh-in-situ pattern  (S-Wh-V pattern) in their production of Korean wh-questions (71% overall) and; 4) there was a no significant difference between the two group's production of wh-in-situ pattern.  These results were taken to suggest that heritage students are not advantaged over non-heritage students in regard to overcoming L1 interference in the acquisition of Korean null subject and wh-in-situ constructions. 


The Multimedia Approach to Language Learning – Past, Present, and Future

Mary Kim

Foreign Service Institute

The author will discuss her experiences in designing and applying multimedia technology to the teaching of the Korean language since the early 1980’s.  She will give an overview of the evolution of multimedia environments and design considerations for the enhancement of language learning.  More specifically, she will illustrate the major design features of her interactive video program she developed for the Defense Department in a joint effort with Brigham Young University.  She will also illustrate how an online design tool, called the Instructional Design Environment, a software developed by the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, is essential for rationalizing and documenting design decisions and facilitating team work and future course revision, modification, or reproduction.

She will discuss the current Korean language curriculum being offered at the Foreign Service Institute, U.S. Department of State, where she supervises the Korean and Japanese language programs. An effort is currently underway for providing the Basic Korean Course with multimedia capabilities online for distance learning.  The course contents and representative lesson activities for developing the speaking, listening, and reading proficiency will be illustrated.


Implementation and Evaluation of an Approach to Task-based

Korean Language Teaching

Youngkyu Kim, Dong-Kwan Kong, Jin-Hwa Lee and Younggeun Lee

National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa

This paper describes a result, obtained from multiple sources (e.g., students, teachers and researchers) by multiple data collection methods (questionnaires, unstructured interviews, class observations and conferences among researchers), of an implementation of a task-based approach to teaching Korean as a foreign language at a United States tertiary Korean language program, conducted by the National Foreign Language Resource Center (NFLRC) at the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UHM). Task-based language teaching (TBLT) has been suggested as a viable alternative approach to foreign language program development, ranging from needs analysis to materials design to testing, with its strong support from many years of research into second language acquisition (SLA). Few attempts, however, have been made to implement any TBLT initiative in foreign language classroom and thus to prove its asserted superiority over widespread traditional approaches. This study aims to put TBLT proposals into practice and evaluate them empirically. After briefly explaining what TBLT is and what the relationship between TBLT and SLA is, this paper describes an on-going Korean TBLT project at UHM, first implemented in Korean language teaching, touching upon such phases in TBLT program development as needs analysis, identification of target tasks and target task types, conversion of target tasks types into pedagogic tasks, design of TBLT materials, classroom implementation and evaluation and focusing in particular on evaluation of the two TBLT modules (i.e., Following Directions and Shopping for Clothes). This paper emphasizes the importance of (a) identification of learners’ needs using multiple methods and multiple sources, (b) matching learners’ needs with Korean language teaching programs developed to meet such needs, and (c) developing Korean language teaching materials to better serve this purpose. This paper provides a concrete model of this endeavor with wide applicability to tertiary-level Korean language programs for English-speaking Korean language learners.


Using HyperStudio for Teaching Korean

Eun-Hee Koo

Hope International University

The HyperStudio is an educational software for developing an integrative project of learning activities which will help students’ independence, organization skills, interest and motivation, incorporate computer technology and different individual learning styles.  

The presenter will analyze and discuss the rationales and purposes of using the HyperStudio project to address integration of technology into instruction. The presentation will also include introduction of the basic components of an electric HyperStudio stack. Instruction of how to create each of the components will be demonstrated.

The purpose of this workshop is to demonstrate the example projects that have been created by the presenter, and present how to use HyperStudio for developing four language skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing). 

At the end of this workshop, the participants will be able to

understand the basic function of HyperStudio, and develop their own project using HyperStudio.


Recent Trends in Foreign Language Teaching in America:

Focus on the Minority Language Policy

Dong Jae Lee

University of Hawaii

  This paper surveys recent trends of the foreign language policy in the US particularly with respect to minority languages.  The early stance was subtractive bilingualism. It is now moving toward additive bilingualism which in particular emphasizes utilizing the acquired built-in foreign language proficiency of heritage learners of minority languages for the national security.

  Bilingual Education Acts of 1968 and 1974 also known as Title VII and subsequent 1978, 1984, 1988 amendments provided supplemental funding for school districts interested in establishing programs to meet the "special educational needs" of large numbers of  (mainly immigrant) children of limited English speaking ability in the United States.  However, the underlying language policy recommends a subtractive policy of assimilation into English for minority languages. This advocates “English Only” policy in the US. The costs of such monolingualism are well discussed by Snow and Hakuta.

  It was for the first time that the additive bilingual polity was systematically proposed in Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for the 21st Century. Its philosophy statement declares:

… This imperative envisions a future in which ALL students will develop and maintain proficiency in English and at least one other language, modern or classical. Children who come to school from non-English-speaking backgrounds should also have opportunities to develop further proficiencies in their first language (emphasis added).

The scarcity of proficient bilingual speakers is taken up as a matter of national security and it is well documented by the National Security Education Program, which states in its overview of their new project (2000):

Some 80 federal agencies and offices involved in areas related to U.S. national security rely increasingly on human resources with high levels of language competency and international knowledge and experience. Finding these resources, and in particu1ar finding candidates for employment as professionals in the US Government, has proven increasingly difficult, and many agencies now report shortfalls in hiring, deficits in readiness, and adverse impacts on operations.

The NSEP targets the heritage learners as the most promising candidates:

There are a number of student populations, both undergraduate and graduate, that would enroll in flagship programs.  A critical constituency of each student population is the heritage learner (emphasis original).

Heritage learners are not only not shown discrimination against but are solicited for their contribution in this nationally critical area.


Lee, D. J. 1989. Review of Papers on Minority Language Policies in China, Japan, and USA. Invited paper at Globalization of Korean Culture: 6th Annual Conference on Koreans Abroad. Hong Kong.

____(Editor in Chief). 2000. Studies on Korean in Community Schools. Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Univ. of Hawaii.

Mora, J. K. 2000 Legal History of Bilingual Education. ttp://coe.sdsu.edu/people/jmora/Pages/HistoryBE.

National Security Education Program. October 2000. National Flagship Language Initiative.

Schemo, Diana. 2001. Washington Cites Shortage of Linguists for Key Security Jobs. The New York Times. April 16, 2001.

Snow, C. and Hakuta K. 1992. The cost of monolingualism. In J. Crawford (ed.) Language Loyalties: A Source Book on the Official English Controversy (pp.384-94). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.





Defense Language Institute, Foreign Language Center

E-mail: lees2@pom-emh1.army.mil

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the speaking performance of a group of American students attending the Defense Language Institute (DLI) during the months of August and September of 2000.  Students enrolled in the DLI Korean Basic course receive 63 weeks of instruction, to include six instructional hours per day, five days a week.  The students I analyzed were between their 53rd and 59th week of instruction, therefore they had received approximately 1350 hours of instruction.

The speaking practice was done mainly in conjunction with students’ Defense Language Proficiency Test (DLPT), taken before graduation. The assumed level of proficiency for students at this stage of schooling is 1+ (Intermediate High by ACTFL scale), and in some cases higher. Topics I chose, therefore, were in accordance with their level.  Even though it was practice, I employed standard Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) format: a warm-up, level check, probe, and wind-down. The practice usually lasted about 20 minutes and with the students’ consent, I recorded our conversation and transcribed it later for my own benefit.

Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR) Speaking Skill Level Descriptions are the rating criteria for the OPI.  They describe what a person with a given level of proficiency can and cannot do.  The descriptions are by no means exhaustive, but rather a holistic nature. What I have attempted to do in this paper is view students’ performance in the light of the ILR descriptions.  

Furthermore, my ultimate goal is to contribute data in the pedagogical, curriculum, and assessment fields by means of my findings.

Abstract-18    Steven Lee and Ruth Ahn

                        California State University, Dominguez Hills


Relative clauses in KFL learners’ writing

Sunyoung Lee

University of Hawaii at Manoa

This paper investigates KFL (Korean as a foreign language) learners’ acquisition of Korean relative clauses based on free writing composition data.  The acquisition order of relative clauses has been studied in SLA especially related to Keenan and Comrie’s (1977) accessibility hierarchy of relativization (i.e. S > O > I.O. etc.).  However, after considering the grammatical position of the noun that a relative clause modifies, Wolfe-Quintero (1998) proposed a two-tier analysis of acquisition order based on ESL (English as a second language) learners’ English composition data.  She argues that the O-tier (i. e. relative clauses modifying the object of the main clauses) is relatively easier to acquire than the S-tier (i.e. relative clauses modifying the subject of the main clauses) (i.e. OS> OO/SS > SO etc.).  This paper explores the question whether the accessibility hierarchies of relative clauses based on ESL learners’ English data also conform to the KFL learners’ Korean data.

Free composition data were collected from 26 English-speaking learners of Korean and 14 native speakers of Korean for this study.  First, it was found that both KFL learners and native speakers produced subject relative clauses much more than object relative clauses, confirming the prediction of Keenan and Comrie’s hierarchy.  Second, however, both learners and native speakers produced SS and SO patterns (i.e. S-tier) more than OS and OO patterns (i.e. O-tier), contrary to Wolfe-Quintero’s accessibility hierarchy.  Third, moreover, when the object of the main clause was modified by relative clause (i.e. O-tier), it was found that the subject of the main clause was likely to be dropped. 

The differences between Korean and English data is explained by processing theory.  In left branching languages like Korean, left-branching structures (e.g. S-tier) are easier to process than the right-branching structure (e.g. O-tier).  Kuno (1974) also proposes a similar idea that relative clauses tend to appear at the beginning of a sentence in head final languages whereas they tend to appear at the end of a sentence in head initial languages.  In conclusion, Wolfe-Quintero’s accessibility hierarchy of relative clauses based on English data cannot predict KFL learner’s acquisition of Korean relative clause. 


Keenan, E.L., & Comrie, B. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. 

Linguistic Inquiry. 8 (1): 63-99.

Kuno, S. 1974. The position of relative clauses and conjunctions. Linguistic Inquiry 5 (1): 


Wolfe-Quintero, K. (1998).  Relative clause hierarchies and second language writing. 

Paper presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics Colloquium: Research on Second Language Writing, Seattle, WA. 


effects of task complexity on l2 production

Young-Geun Lee

University of Hawaii at Manoa

Identification of objective criteria for sequencing pedagogic tasks and of parameters or dimensions of task complexity and difficulty is essential in implementing task-based language teaching. One line of research has been to identify cognitive dimensions of the difficulty of tasks, and to assess the effects on measures of learner language of tasks performed at easy and complex ends of each dimension (Robinson, 1998, 2001)

This study attempts to address the question of whether differing degrees of task complexity affect the accuracy and complexity of L2 oral production, and if yes, how different would accuracy and complexity be. It is an expanded follow-up study to Lee (2000), which examined effects of differential task complexity in terms of the dimensions of contextualization and competing task demands on KFL learners’ production on two versions of the narrative and the map tasks, respectively.

In the present study, the participants were asked to do two tasks, i.e., giving directions on the map task followed by the picture description task. The participants in the study were three KFL learners who were enrolled in advanced KFL course an American university. For the map task, the participants were asked to give directions from Point A to Point B, marked on the map of an area of Seoul. The same map was used for all three versions, i.e., simple, complex, and very complex, of the task, but they differed in terms of the distance between two points, the number of left/right turns, the presence of the buildings which could be used as a reference, presence of the need to cross the road, etc. On the other hand, for the picture description task, the participants were presented with three folders each containing four photographs showing the consecutive events leading up to a road accident involving model cars. They were then asked to describe how the accident happened. The three versions, i.e., simple, complex, and very complex, of the car crash task differ from each other in terms of the number and types of cars, the number of pedestrians, the road conditions, and the moving directions of cars. The sequences of the three versions of each task were counterbalanced to control for possible sequencing effects.

Participant production was tape-recorded and transcribed. Data were coded by the researcher for eight different measures, i.e., the four accuracy and four complexity measures. Due to the small number of participants (N=3), statistical analysis using, e.g., a repeated measures MANOVA, can not be done.

The results show that differing degrees of task complexity did affect the complexity of oral production, but the differences were more clearly shown in the car crash task than in the map task. Implications of the findings for task-based syllabus design and further research are also discussed.

Lee, Y.-G. (2000). Effects of degrees of task complexity on L2 production. In S. Kang (Ed.), Korean Language in America 5. Monterey, CA: The American Association of Teachers of Korean.

Robinson, P. (1998). State of the art: SLA theory and second language syllabus design. The Language Teacher, 22(4), 7-14.

Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1).



Error Analysis in Relation to Typological Differences

Bo Y. Park

Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center

            The presenter will explain the parametric differences between the right-branching languages such as English and the left-branching languages such as Korean. He will provide several English and Korean sentences as examples.

Then, the presenter will analyze the parametric-differences-related errors frequently made by the native speakers of English who are learning Korean when they make complex and comparative sentences. In analyzing the complex sentences that have past, present, and future attributive forms, the presenter will demonstrate the actual errors made by the American learners of Korean. He will also demonstrate specific errors that the American students learning Korean make when they produce complex sentences that have parts equivalent to English subordinate conjunctions such as “if,” “because,”  “before,”  “after,” and “until.”  He will also display the American learners’ errors related to the parametric differences when they make comparative sentences. After this, he will explain why they make such errors, comparing Korean and English grammar.

Next, the presenter will exhibit how to prevent the above-mentioned errors with three exercises made from authentic Korean materials (Korean newspaper and magazine

Articles.) The first exercise is to ask students to mark the parts that are equivalent to “than”, ‘if’, and “until,” and also mark present attributive forms of verbs. The second exercise is to ask students to mark the parts that are equivalent to “because,”  “after,” and “before,” and to mark past and future attributive forms of verbs. The third exercise is a four-skills-integrated exercise for internalizing the use of the present attributive form of a verb, a subordinate conjunction, “if,” and the preposition, “than.” The presenter will state why such exercises are necessary for the students.

While using transparencies and flipcharts, the presenter will conduct this session,

facilitating interaction between the presenter and the participants. The participants will be aware of the implications of the parametric differences in foreign language teaching. They will also be able to gain a hands-on knowledge on how to deal with these differences when teaching Korean.




“Exploring the possibilities of web-based tests (WBTs) for the Korean language, primarily for operational testing purposes.”

Siwon Park

University of Hawai’i at Manoa

The current paper is to explore the possibilities of web-based tests (WBTs) for the Korean language, primarily for operational testing purposes (self-assessment, curriculum-based achievement, and placement assessments). Web-based tests (WBTs) are delivered via the Internet, therefore, they increase the flexibility and accessibility to test-takers and also allow test administrators to provide the test-takers with immediate scoring and detailed performance feedbacks, while keeping the cost low. The significance of the WBTs appears to be evident in two aspects: its contributions to the field of language testing and active adaptation of technology into language teaching and testing in general.

In the first portion of this paper, theoretical and technical concerns are shown regarding the use of WBTs within a Korean language program. First, following a brief introduction to WBTs, the advantages and the disadvantages of the WBTs over other types of testing methods are examined. Second, three different types of WBTs – self-assessment, curriculum-based achievement (mid-term and final based), and placement assessments – are introduced with examples. This portion also includes relevant theoretical concerns to the three testing methods and purposes, and how WBTs can contribute to realizing the purposes.

The second portion of the paper discusses a WBT project conducted within a Korean program at a university in the U.S. First, a brief background of the project is given. Following the introduction, the researcher presents an actual prototype WBT platform developed through the project. This section also describes the students and teachers reactions to the WBTs administered in that program. Since paper and pencil format tests, in addition to WBTs, were given to the students, their preference and reasons were also examined and reported. The last part of the second portion is devoted to examining problems related to the test platforms, availability of the different types of WBT items, issues of the Korean font, and so forth.

The current paper concludes with the future directions and the possible contributions of the WBTs to language assessment for less commonly taught languages, such as Korean in the U.S.


Communication and Discourse Strategies

Used by Intermediate Learners of Korean

Hye-Sook Wang

Brown University

This paper aims to examine communication strategies and discourse (politeness)  markers used by the learners of Korean at the intermediate level.  Five 30-minute conversations made by five groups of learners will be analyzed.  Communication strategies will be analyzed according to Faerch and Kasper’s (1983) paradigm and discourse markers will be analyzed according to Holm’s (1995) paradigm.  Each group consists of four learners (both same sex and mixed sex) and they discussed a topic assigned by the investigator for 30 minutes. 

While much research has been conducted on the grammatical aspects of learning Korean as a second or foreign language, studies on communicative or socio-pragmatic aspects are still scarce perhaps due to the traditional emphasis on grammar.  When learners reach a certain level of proficiency in linguistic competence, they should be able to attain the same level of communicative competence as well.  However, we teachers frequently observe that learners are more likely to opt out for an easy way out when there is a communication gap caused by lack of vocabulary or expressions, rather than employing proper communication strategies.  Even learners who are quite fluent in the language struggle in such situations because they either are not aware of such options of utilizing strategies or they are not trained how to use them.  Similarly, learners often unintentionally offend their interlocutors by sounding impolite simply because they are unable to use politeness markers appropriately when they are required. 

It is important to teach learners how they can cope with stumbling blocks in communication.  Research on these issues will help us to better understand not only the difficulties that learners deal with but also what teachers can do about them.  


Heritage and non-heritage students instructional issues

Clare You

University of California, Berkeley

I will discuss three parts of those issues:

1.     Structure of the program - One track or two-track program?

     The rationale behind each program.

        2.  Pedagogical issues - How to identify the needs of multi-level students.

             What kinds of placement and testing are needed.

             What materials should be used for a multi-level class.

             How students are grouped.

        3. Language specific problems

            What are the needs of Korean-American students in  learning Korean?

            What to do when a two-track system is not available?                                 

            What would be the benefits for the heritage and non-heritage students to be in one 




Korean Language Education in New York Public Schools

Bongsoon Yow

Flushing High School

The Korean Native Language Arts (NLA) program began in 1979 as a part of
bilingual education program for immigrant students with limited English
proficiency.  The paper I am going to write will address the following:

1) a brief history of Korean NLA program in New York City

2) Korean NLA for foreign language credits and Regents exam for Regents


3) New York City middle school and high school student population and their

4) curricular issues, content based teaching method, NLA classes as a means
of passing the English Regents test and textbooks

5) teachers' profile: their teaching certificates and experience

6) Issues concerning the students' enrollment

7) recommendations


Socio-pragmatic functions of the Korean sentence ender –ney

from the politeness perspective.

Soo-ah Kim Yuen

Language Arts and Science Dept.

University of Hawaii Kapiolani Community College

This paper is to synchronically investigate the socio-pragmatic functions of Korean sentence ender -ney as it is used in various interactive social contexts. The sentence ender -ney essentially denotes an exclamatory self-addressed statement resulting from the speaker’s spontaneous discovery of an event, which may contradict his expectation or simply be a surprise. The self-addressed monologue sentence ender -ney in contemporary Korean conversation has evolved into an interactive function, while keeping it original function. The –ney is the second most frequently used sentence ender (euqal in frequency with –telakwu) in contemporary conversation. According to investigation, sentence ender -ney displays diverse interactive functions across a wide range of social context. The study reveals that the sentence ender -ney is used as a discourse strategic device to mitigate illocutionary force. And the –ney also reflects the speaker’s socio-cultural knowledge within the set of behavioral norms determined by Korean social customs. This study sheds light on Korean women’s converational style when engaging in refusal/denial of an offer. This paper also assesses –ney’s

intonation contour to determine its function.

In order to explicate the function of sentence ender -ney, the interactional sociolinguistic approach and Brown and Levinson’s politeness theory are used as analytical frameworks.


  return home