KOREAN AND UZBEK AS AGGLUTINATIVE LANGUAGES: A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR EFFECTIVE TEACHING METHODOLOGY
Keywords:
agglutinative languages, Korean, Uzbek, contrastive analysis, CLT, second language acquisitionAbstract
This study investigates the structural similarities and differences between Korean and Uzbek as agglutinative languages and examines their pedagogical implications for effective language instruction. Both languages demonstrate agglutinative morphology characterized by the linear addition of suffixes, yet they differ significantly in phonology, pragmatics, and sociolinguistic features. A mixed-method research design was employed, involving 80 Uzbek learners of Korean divided into experimental and control groups over a 16-week period. The experimental group was taught using a combined Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and contrastive analysis approach, while the control group followed traditional grammar-based instruction.
Quantitative data were collected through pre- and post-tests, while qualitative data were obtained via classroom observations and learner feedback. The results indicate statistically significant improvement in communicative competence, grammatical accuracy, and learner motivation in the experimental group (p < 0.05). The study highlights the importance of leveraging positive language transfer while addressing negative transfer through targeted pedagogical strategies. The findings contribute to applied linguistics and offer practical recommendations for Korean language teaching in Uzbek contexts.
References
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. Pearson.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge University Press.
Savignon, S. J. (2002). Interpreting communicative language teaching. Yale University Press.
Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Sohn, H. M. (1999). The Korean language. Cambridge University Press.
Comrie, B. (1989). Language universals and linguistic typology. University of Chicago Press.
Crystal, D. (2003). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Haspelmath, M. (2010). Comparative concepts and descriptive categories. Language, 86(3), 663–687.
Johanson, L. (1998). The structure of Turkic. In The Turkic languages. Routledge.
Kornfilt, J. (1997). Turkish. Routledge.
Lee, I., & Ramsey, S. (2000). The Korean language. SUNY Press.
Song, J. J. (2005). The Korean language: Structure, use and context. Routledge.
Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition. Routledge.
Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer. Cambridge University Press.
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. University of Michigan Press.
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.
Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second language. Heinle.
Azerbaijan
Türkiye
Uzbekistan
Kazakhstan
Turkmenistan
Kyrgyzstan
Republic of Korea
Japan
India
United States of America
Kosovo