Toward Culturally Sustaining Korean as a Foreign Language (KFL) Textbooks: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Linguistic, Cultural, and Racial Ideologies Across Earlier and Revised Editions

IF 0.1 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE
Eunae Kim
{"title":"Toward Culturally Sustaining Korean as a Foreign Language (KFL) Textbooks: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Linguistic, Cultural, and Racial Ideologies Across Earlier and Revised Editions","authors":"Eunae Kim","doi":"10.1111/modl.70080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article critically examines Korean as a Foreign Language (KFL) textbooks published by major Korean universities and widely used around the world. Using critical discourse analysis and a culturally sustaining pedagogy (CSP) perspective, this article analyzes how earlier and revised textbooks represent language, culture, and race, and whether these representations align with CSP principles. Findings reveal that although revised editions introduce more nationalities and visibly diverse characters, the underlying racial logics of the earlier editions remain unchanged, where whiteness remains the default Western norm, Korean ethnonationalism persists, and racialized hierarchies are reproduced in subtler forms. Similarly, cultural representation remains static. Despite the inclusion of contemporary examples, culture continues to be framed as fixed, homogeneous, and nationally bounded, with little attention to hybrid, diasporic, or learners’ lived cultural practices. In terms of language, despite minor gestures toward multilingual awareness in the revised editions, the textbooks continue to privilege standard Seoul Korean while erasing regional, diasporic, and hybrid varieties, thus reinforcing a monolingual ideology that marginalizes learners’ diverse linguistic repertoires. Together, these patterns illustrate the persistent dominance of monolingual and monocultural ideologies in materials intended for linguistically and culturally diverse learners. Through a CSP lens, this article underscores the need for more inclusive KFL curricula that fully reflect and sustain the diverse linguistic, cultural, and migratory experiences of contemporary KFL learners.","PeriodicalId":42049,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE MIDWEST MODERN LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION","volume":"451 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE MIDWEST MODERN LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.70080","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article critically examines Korean as a Foreign Language (KFL) textbooks published by major Korean universities and widely used around the world. Using critical discourse analysis and a culturally sustaining pedagogy (CSP) perspective, this article analyzes how earlier and revised textbooks represent language, culture, and race, and whether these representations align with CSP principles. Findings reveal that although revised editions introduce more nationalities and visibly diverse characters, the underlying racial logics of the earlier editions remain unchanged, where whiteness remains the default Western norm, Korean ethnonationalism persists, and racialized hierarchies are reproduced in subtler forms. Similarly, cultural representation remains static. Despite the inclusion of contemporary examples, culture continues to be framed as fixed, homogeneous, and nationally bounded, with little attention to hybrid, diasporic, or learners’ lived cultural practices. In terms of language, despite minor gestures toward multilingual awareness in the revised editions, the textbooks continue to privilege standard Seoul Korean while erasing regional, diasporic, and hybrid varieties, thus reinforcing a monolingual ideology that marginalizes learners’ diverse linguistic repertoires. Together, these patterns illustrate the persistent dominance of monolingual and monocultural ideologies in materials intended for linguistically and culturally diverse learners. Through a CSP lens, this article underscores the need for more inclusive KFL curricula that fully reflect and sustain the diverse linguistic, cultural, and migratory experiences of contemporary KFL learners.
朝著文化永续的韩国语教材:早期与修订版本中语言、文化与种族意识形态的批判性话语分析
本文对韩国主要大学出版的、在世界上广泛使用的对外韩国语教材进行了批判性的分析。本文采用批判性话语分析和文化维持教学法(CSP)的视角,分析了早期和修订后的教科书如何表现语言、文化和种族,以及这些表现是否符合CSP原则。研究结果表明,虽然修订版引入了更多的民族和明显多样化的人物,但早期版本的潜在种族逻辑保持不变,其中白人仍然是西方的默认规范,朝鲜民族民族主义仍然存在,种族化的等级制度以更微妙的形式再现。同样,文化表现也保持不变。尽管包含了当代的例子,文化仍然被框定为固定的、同质的和有国家界限的,很少关注混合的、散居的或学习者的生活文化实践。在语言方面,尽管修订版在多语言意识方面做出了微小的姿态,但教科书继续优先考虑标准的首尔韩国语,同时抹去地区、散居和混合品种,从而强化了一种单一语言的意识形态,将学习者的多种语言技能边缘化。总之,这些模式表明,在为语言和文化多样化的学习者设计的材料中,单语言和单一文化的意识形态一直占据主导地位。通过CSP的视角,本文强调需要更具包容性的KFL课程,以充分反映和维持当代KFL学习者多样化的语言、文化和迁移经历。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Midwest Modern Language Association publishes articles on literature, literary theory, pedagogy, and the state of the profession written by M/MLA members. One issue each year is devoted to the informal theme of the recent convention and is guest-edited by the year"s M/MLA president. This issue presents a cluster of essays on a topic of broad interest to scholars of modern literatures and languages. The other issue invites the contributions of members on topics of their choosing and demonstrates the wide range of interests represented in the association. Each issue also includes book reviews written by members on recent scholarship.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书