This study uses errors found in essays by Korean learners in Taiwan and Japan as research material and from the findings compares and analyzes the types and causes of learners’ grammatical and lexical errors. Regarding grammatical errors, the following three conclusions were reached. (a) The causes of errors (intralingual or interlingual) by Korean learners in both countries are often the same. (b) When the type of error is the same, there is no difference in the error ratio between the two countries, but the causes of error may differ. (c) There are errors that appear in only one of the countries. Regarding lexical errors, similar error patterns - namely, “error by target word synonyms”, “error by direct translation of Chinese characters in the mother tongue”, and “error due to difference from mother tongue”-emerged from learners in both countries due to the commonality of the use of Chinese characters in the three languages of Chinese, Japanese, and Korean. The cause of errors was all due to “transfer”, except for “error by target words’ synonyms”.
This study aims to see the differences among Chinese Korean Learners(CKL), Vietnamese Korean Learners(VKL), and Korean Native Speakers (KNS) in awareness of linguistic impoliteness. For this aim, the study sets two research questions : 1. Do CKL and VKL understand the literal utterance the same way as KNL do?, and 2. Do CKL and VKL understand the nonliteral utterance the same way as KNL do? Literal utterance include utterances with politeness and impoliteness, whereas nonliteral utterance refers to utterances with mock politeness and mock impoliteness. The study surveyed a total of 195 participants (65 from each group of KNS, CKL, and VKL) about their awareness on expressions of impoliteness, and applied a multiple response analysis on the results. As for the research question 1, CKL and VKL had a similar understanding as the KNS on the speakers’ attitude and intention. However, the cases of discrepancies between the learners and KNS were more frequent in utterances of impoliteness than politeness. As for the research question 2 on nonliteral utterance with mock politeness and mock impoliteness, although some learners understood nonliteral utterance the same way as KNL did, many took it for its literal meanings and understood the opposite of KNS. The discrepancies were especially wide in cases of superficially indirect and polite utterances using interrogative forms. The results imply the need to teach linguistic impoliteness and meanings that could vary depending on the situation context. Korean language learners’ misunderstanding and wrong reaction on linguistic impoliteness could cause a serious communication failure. This study could be a stepping stone for more research on linguistic impoliteness, and eventually to putting more emphasis on teaching impolite expressions on fields of education as opposed to conventional focus on positive nature of the language.
The purpose of this study is to investigate Korean native speakers’ acceptability on pragmatic failure of American Korean learners’ non-verbal behaviors. Korean’s pragmatic judgement on unmarked non-verbal behaviors in USA was examined. A survey of a total of 22 Korean native speakers was conducted. Each questionnaire item consisted of a 6-point Likert scale and an open-ended question, and the responses were analysed in SPSS 26.0 and Nvivo 12 Pro. The results indicate that Korean speakers’ pragmatic acceptability was varied in all 6 situations according to the difference of non-verbal behaviors, and also it was statistically significant. Unmarked non-verbal behaviors in USA were considered pragmatic failures by Korean native speakers, and it was more salient in the case of a factor of high social status or the high degree of face-threat in speech acts. As a whole, the pedagogic implication focusing on pragmatic failure-expected items in non-verbal behaviors was suggested, and the necessity of including cultural aspects in language education was discussed.
This study attempted to grasp the characteristics of errors by statistically analyzing the corpus of errors in large-scale learners. This study examined the characteristics of language-specific errors in the location, pattern, and level of errors in the learner’s corpus using the multinominal logistic regression model along with the occurrence rate. As a result, it was possible to identify characteristic error types with high or low probability of occurrence by student’s language. Through this study, the results that can be referred to in order to summarize the characteristic types of language-specific errors were presented. This study is meaningful in that it statistically searched for significant variables for each language region by comparing and analyzing the overall errors using large-scale learner balance corpus data.
A good deal of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research has investigated the effectiveness of textual enhancement, as an implicit attention-drawing device, for L2 Spanish learning. This methodological synthesis reviews all experimental and quasi-experimental studies published between 1981 and 2019 that examined the effects of textual enhancement on L2 Spanish development. This study employed systematic procedures to survey the research domain and quantitative meta-analytic techniques to code and analyze methodological practices of primary research. Thirteen unique sample studies qualified for inclusion were retrieved, and each study report was coded for methodological features related to sampling, research designs, and statistical analyses and data reporting conventions. The results indicate not only several strengths but also a number of areas in need of improvement in research and reporting practices. Based on the findings, suggestions for future investigations are made to advance methodological and reporting practices in the domain.
