The aim of this study is to help in developing better teaching and learning methods of Korean Causative sentences for Hindi native speakers by uncovering the similarities and differences through the contrastive analysis of causative constructions in K... The aim of this study is to help in developing better teaching and learning methods of Korean Causative sentences for Hindi native speakers by uncovering the similarities and differences through the contrastive analysis of causative constructions in Korean and Hindi. Being almost a universal grammar category, the process of causativization is frequently used in day to day life. Thus, it has an important place in language learning and teaching. But realization of causation differs from language to language. The process of causativization in Korean reveals through four types of processes such as morphological, syntactic, '(-)sikhi-' and lexical types, while Hindi has only morphological and syntactic ways of making causative sentences. Both Korean and Hindi causative sentences formed through the causative suffixes added in the root of verbs. Korean has various morphological causative affixes and generally these suffixes convey the meaning of direct causation, while in Hindi, there are mainly two morphological causative suffixes which differ with a distinct meaning in converting the verbs into direct and indirect causation. Moreover, in comparison to Korean syntactic causation, morphological, '(-)sikhi-' and lexical causation show very rare and unproductive ways to realize causativization and only to some specific kind of verbs. On the contrary morphological and syntactic causations in Hindi are very much productive. Korean syntactic causative sentences are productive in nature but semanticly it is very much contextual while Hindi syntactic causative sentences give a specific meaning. Apart of these vital morphological and semantic differences, there are numerous other differences which make it difficult to understand these processes for the native Hindi speakers who learn Korean language. These difficulties can be eased by identifying the differences of Korean causative sentences and Hindi causative sentences and teaching Korean causative sentences. This can also be more effectively achieved by contrasting the differences and similarities of Korean and Hindi causative sentences and applying these findings while teaching to Hindi native speakers. However, there is a complete lack of contrastive studies on the Korean and Hindi causative sentences. This study hopes to fill in the missing gap in the research area of causativization and add to the resources on the topic. This study is divided into six chapters. Chapter one discusses the purpose and necessity of this study and research method. It also analyzes the previous studies related to Korean and Hindi causative construction. Chapter two explores the concept of causation and causative sentences in Korean and Hindi. The classification of causative sentences in both languages has also been discussed. There is a debate over the qualification of Korean causative sentences. Generally Korean academia discusses only morphological, syntactic and lexical causative sentences. Some scholars consider the ‘(-)sikhi-’ causative sentence as lexical causative while others consider it morphologically derived form. The present study accepts both perspectives and classifies it separately in view of contrast with Hindi language. As far as Hindi causative sentences are concerned, mainly morphological causative sentences have been discussed widely. In accordance with Korean syntactic causative sentences this work has also discussed the Hindi syntactic(periphrastic) causative sentences. Chapter three carries out an contrastive analysis of Korean and Hindi causative sentences based on morphological, syntactic and semantic aspects mentioned in Dixon(2000). In morphological part, it investigates the form of causation while it checks the changes in argument and case particles of causee, causer and mediator causer in syntactic part. Finally, in semantic part, it discusses the seven semantic parameters; state/action, transitivity, control, volition, directness, intention and naturalness. Out of these seven parameters state/action and transitivity are related to verb, control and volition are related to causes and directness, intention and naturalness are related to causer of causative sentences. In each part, it discovers the similarities and differences between Korean and Hindi causative sentences. Based on this research, it mentions some possible common mistakes that the native Hindi speakers make while learning and using Korean causative sentences. In order to understand the native Hindi learner’s acquisition of Korean causative sentences chapter four carries out an error analysis survey of intermediate and advanced stages native Hindi Korean language learners, through ‘Korean-Hindi’, ‘Hindi-Korean’ translation of causative sentences. As expected through the contrastive analysis in chapter three, error analysis result has shown that the native Hindi speakers learning Korean language get puzzled with different kinds of causative sentences of Korean and use syntactic Korean sentences extensively. Chapter five provides many suggestions on important points of focus that are needed to apply while teaching Korean causative sentences to Hindi native speakers. Chapter six summarizes the findings of the research carried out in this study and ends with some suggestions for the future work in this field. Key words: Causation, Causative sentences, Contrastive analysis, Korean language education, Native Hindi Korean language learners, Translation task, Error analysis. ，韩语论文网站，韩语毕业论文 |
