Korean teaching order and teaching factors according to contrastive types of Turkish and Korean

For effective Korean language education for Turkish learners, the teaching-learning order and teaching-learning factors were investigated according to the contrastive analytical factors between the two languages. This was collected through the data of 1st to 4th grade students at Ankara University, Erciyes University, and Istanbul University. To this end, according to the characteristics of both languages, Prator's Difficul-ty Hierarchy was modified and 6 types were established and studied. These include the 1. 'Same as Turkish' type, 2. 'Multiple interpretations of one Turkish word' type, 3. 'Incon-sistent with Turkish' type, 4. 'Absence of Turkish' type, 5. 'Multiple interpretations of one Korean word' type and 6. 'Absence of Turkish and Korean differentiated type'. Through this, a difficulty hierarchy was established through student data (data from composition, test, and questionnaire). Afterward, through error evaluation from na-tive speakers, an error severity hierarchy and textbook frequency hierarchy was created. This was done to set both weight of importance and priorities of general learning into con-trastive types. Among them, the type with the highest level of difficulty was type 6. 'Absence of Turkish and differentiated Korean', and the type with the highest level of severity in error evaluation from native speakers was type 2. 'Multiple interpretations of one Turkish word', and the type with the highest textbook frequency hierarchy and error frequency was 5. 'Multiple interpretations of one Korean word', which also ranked highest in priori-ty and weight of importance. It has been found that native speakers of Korean consider communicative error more important than grammar in terms of comprehensibility. There was a very high, direct correlation between the Student Psychological Difficulty in the survey, Unified Difficulty Hierarchy. Although there was a high positive correlation with textbook frequency hierarchy and learning priority hierarchy, there was a high negative correlation between writing difficulty and textbook frequency. Also, error frequency showed a high negative correlation with error severity, but no correlation with the difficulty level. The test results showed a high positive correlation with weight of im-portance. With this, it has been seen that the Combined Difficulty Hierarchy reflects the Student Psychological Difficulty. It has been verified that Error Significance decreases as Error Frequency increases and there is no correlation between Error Frequency and Diffi-culty. It is understood that the students have difficulty using the contents of the type that are rarely seen in the writing in textbooks. Also, it is understood that the high-weight types have low scores on the Test. Therefore, it was confirmed that it is important to im-plement a hierarchy from various aspects in order to establish a Priority and Weight Hier-archy in Korean language education for Turkish students. The sentence final endings were first proposed according to the Korean sentence structure, and then according to the hierarchies of frequency of use (corpus of native speakers of Korean), compound difficulty, and error severity. As a result, starting with -(이)에요(eyo) and -입니다(imnida), the priority hierarchy of -습니다(seumnida), -아/어요(a/eoyo), -지요(jiyo), -(으)ㄹ까요(eulkkayo)?, - (으)세요(euseyo), - (으)십시오(sipsio), -(으)ㅂ시다(eupsida) was deter-mined. The order of importance was -습니다(seumnida), -아/어요(eoyo), -(으)ㄹ까요(eulggayo), -지요(jiyo), - (으)세요(seyo), -(으)십시오(sipsio) and -(으)ㅂ시다(eupshida). Although the sentence final ending - (으)ㄹ까요(eulggayo) was low in the order of priority in the lesson, its importance was considered necessary for that topic. The conjunctive ending were pro-posed with complex hierarchies of difficulty (syntactic, semantic, comparative), frequency of use and error severity. As a result, -지만(jiman), -고(go:juxtaposition), -(으)면(myun:condition), -아/어서(eoso:reason), -는데(neunde:time), -(으)면서(myeonso), -고(go:order), -아/어서(so:order), -(으)니까(nikka:reason) were prioritized. The order of importance was -지만(jiman), -(으)면(myeon), -아/어서(seo:reason), -(으)면서(myonseo), -고(go:juxtaposition), -는데(neunde), -고(go:order), -아/어서(so:order), -도록(dorok) and -(으)니/니까(nikka:reason) up to 10th place. In the order of conjunctive ending, -(으)면(myeon), -아/어서(seo), -(으)면서(myeonso), -(으)려고(ryugo), -(으)려면(ryumyon), -(으)러(reo) and -느라고(neuago) were deemed necessary in the weighted teaching for that topic, even though they were low in priority in the lesson. The correlation between the factors affecting each course and the course ele-ments according to the contrastive type were also investigated with the survey conducted to investigate the effective Education Factors. It was seen that the effective classroom fac-tors were different for each comparative type and especially the type with the most Turk-ish language needs was 3,1,6. Moreover, in each construct, there was a difference in 0the effective classroom factors according to the students' low and high score groups. Therefore, in each structure, the classroom factors to be applied according to the stu-dents' scores should be applied differently for effective teaching. As a result, hierarchies were established according to 6 contrastive types for ef-fective Korean education according to Turkish. Also, effective Instruction Order and Education Factors were determined. In addition, with these, a teaching model can be cre-ated according to each contrastive type in the future. It is considered very urgent and im-portant to establish an effective teaching model, especially for the 5th 'Multiple Mutual' type in Korean, which is the most important in Priority and Weight, and the 6th type, which is the highest in Compound Difficulty, 'Not in Turkish but Divided in Korean'.