The use of visual/verbal and physical mnemonics in the teaching of Korean Hangul in an authentic L2 classroom context

Abstract

This article presents classroom-based research investigating the effects of using visual/verbal and physical mnemonics in the teaching of the Korean script, Hangul. The study compares the performances of two groups of learners: one group taught using mnemonics and one taught in the traditional way (through reference to the “design principles” of Hangul). Results show that the mnemonics group enjoyed significant advantages both on an immediate and a delayed test. This suggests that the memorisation advantages associated with mnemonics extend to alphabetic scripts such as Hangul, in addition to the logographic and syllabic scripts targeted in previous research. Moreover, the analysis shows that when used in authentic courses of study, mnemonics may have more long-term advantages than assumed in previous literature. In addition to out-performing the “design principles” group on the delayed test, the “mnemonics” group were shown to continue using the techniques at least 4/5 weeks after the instruction period, particularly when encountering momentary decoding difficulties. Finally, by including questionnaire and interview data in the analysis, the study was able to confirm that language learners hold positive attitudes towards the use of mnemonics. As well as valuing mnemonics due to the speed of memorisation that they promote, learners are shown to actively enjoy the technique. Contrary to previous concerns that mnemonics may be too frivolous or “embarrassing” for adult learners, these findings present a strong argument for the wider application of mnemonics in the education of writing systems.

Keywords:

• Korean
• Hangul
• Writing systems
• Mnemonics
• Pedagogy

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Joanne Eastlake, Ian Newby, and Fotis Begklis at SOAS/UCL LWW-CETL; and Eunjeong Shin at the Korean Cultural Centre UK. This research was supported by the Academy of Korean Studies of the Republic of Korea.

Notes

¹Although Hangul is the term for the script used in South Korea and adopted into English, in North Korea a different term—Chosongul—is applied.

²Another important reason why teachers may avoid mnemonics is the concern that these techniques frequently make associations between the target language and fictitious etymologies. Some are concerned that these associations provide learners with “inaccurate” information about the language (Richardson, 1998). In addition, teachers may avoid mnemonics due to the associations they make with the learners’ native language and the fear that this may promote negative phonological transfer from the L1.

³Note that my use here of the term “basic consonants” is different to how it is normally applied in Korean linguistics, where it typically refers either only to the five symbols first invented by King Sejong (,,,,) or is used to refer to all of the consonants including aspirated consonants but excluding reinforced consonants. The second usage is closest to my own, the difference being that I exclude aspirated consonants. The motivation for this is consistency with the research design, where aspirated (as well as reinforced) consonants are not included. To emphasise that aspirated (and reinforced) consonants are not included in this definition, I apply the full term “basic/lax consonants”.

⁴The extent to which King Sejong collaborated with the chiphyǒnjǒn (if at all) remains a point of debate (Lee, 1997).

⁵Due to the use of the lunar calendar, it is possible that it was actually 1444.

⁶A recent widely reported attempt occurred in Indonesia, where the Cia-Cia tribe adopted Hangul as their official script (see report in New York Times, 11 September 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/12/world/asia/12script.html).

⁷This treatment of Hangul can be found in various Korean textbooks published in South Korea, including Pathfinder in Korean (Ewha Womans University), Sogang Korean (Sogang University), and Yonsei Korean (Yonsei University). However, some textbooks published in North America, notably Elementary Korean (King and Yeon, Tuttle) and You Speak Korean! (Kim Curtis, and Cho, Paradigm Busters) feature the teaching of some basic expressions in Romanisation before or alongside the introduction of Hangul.

⁸See, for example, Pathfinder in Korean (Ewha Womans University) and Yonsei Korean (Yonsei University). One textbook that does include a variety of interactive exercise for the practice of Hangul is You Speak Korean! (Kim, Curtis, and Cho, Paradigm Busters).

⁹Examples can be found in Pathfinder in Korean (Ewha Womans University) and Sogang Korean (Sogang University).

¹⁰Examples of explicit references to Sejong can be found in Pathfinder in Korean (Ewha Womans University, p. xi) and Yonsei Korean (Yonsei University, p. xii).

¹¹Besides the need to fit the research design into the structure of the syllabus being used, there were other reasons why the aspirated and reinforced consonants (and the important contrast between these and the lax consonants) were not included in the research design. First, given their phonological and orthographic similarity to the lax consonants (and the fact that the reinforced consonants in particular are so different to any sounds found in English), teaching the aspirated and reinforced series through mnemonics does not appear to be a viable option. Second, although learners doubtlessly encounter problems in differentiating between lax, aspirated and reinforced consonants, the primary reason for this appears to be phonological differentiation (i.e., the problem of learning phonological contrasts different to those present in their L1) rather than memorisation. Although mnemonics may help with the latter, it is doubtful that they can assist the former. Ultimately, the current paper is examining the use of mnemonics to assist memorisation of the basics of Hangul—it is unlikely that the technique can be used to teach all phonological and orthographic complexities.