HSC Korean Continuers common mistakes
HSC Korean Continuers · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In Listening and Responding, the candidate copies the first number, time, or date heard into the answer without checking whether a later clause revises it (e.g. hearing '세 시' and stopping before '세 시 반이 아니라 네 시예요').
Under exam pressure candidates treat the first mention as the answer and stop actively listening, but Korean listening texts routinely restate, self-correct, or contrast information with -이 아니라/-(으)ㄴ데 constructions that change the correct value.
What to do instead
Train with a two-pass method: on the first pass note only keywords and the question focus; on the second pass listen specifically for correction markers (-이 아니라, 사실은, 다시 말하면, 그런데) and write the final stated value, then re-check the answer against the whole utterance before moving on.
In Listening and Responding, the candidate answers a question about the speaker's feeling or intention by quoting the literal words spoken instead of inferring the implied attitude (e.g. answering '기분이 좋다' because 좋다 appeared, when the tone and context signal annoyance or reluctance).
Higher-mark items test inference, but candidates translate word-by-word and never build a model of who is speaking, to whom, and why, so irony, hedging, and indirect refusal (-(으)ㄹ까 봐, 좀 그렇네요, 글쎄요) are missed.
What to do instead
Practise identifying speaker, listener, and purpose before answering, and keep a personal list of indirect-speech and attitude cues (걱정된다, 아쉽다, 어쩔 수 없다, 귀찮다) mapped to likely feelings; justify each answer with the specific phrase that supports the inference.
In Listening and Responding, the candidate writes the answer in English or in a mixed English-Korean shorthand, or gives a one-word Korean answer where the question asks what the speaker will do next or why.
Candidates run out of time and default to the language they think in, and they underestimate how much of the mark depends on producing a complete Korean response that matches the question type (action, reason, comparison).
What to do instead
Before the recording starts, note the question type and the grammatical form the answer needs (-(으)려고 하다 for intention, -기 때문에 for reason); answer in a full Korean clause using the text's own vocabulary, and reserve the reading time to check that each response is in Korean and complete.
In Reading and Responding, the candidate matches a question keyword to the same word in the text and selects that sentence as the answer, ignoring the surrounding negation, condition, or contrast.
Keyword matching is fast and feels safe, but HSC texts deliberately place distractors near the target vocabulary and put the real information in a subordinate clause or after a contrastive -지만/-(으)ㄴ 반면.
What to do instead
Read the question first, then read the whole relevant paragraph before choosing; underline negation (안, 못, -지 않다) and condition markers (-면, -어야, -는데) and rewrite the key sentence in the candidate's own words to confirm the meaning before answering.
In Reading and Responding, the candidate misreads the register and relationship in a text (honorific -시-, humble 드리다/뵙다, plain form -다) and so misidentifies who is writing to whom or which notice applies to which audience.
School courses often focus on vocabulary and topic comprehension, so formality levels are recognised as grammar points rather than as meaning-bearing clues about audience, obligation, and politeness.
What to do instead
For every text, record three things in the margin: the relationship (friend, teacher, customer, public notice), the speech level used, and the purpose (request, apology, announcement); practise converting the same content between 해요체, 합니다체, and 한다체 to see how audience changes the message.
In Reading and Responding, the candidate leaves inference and 'what does the writer suggest/imply' questions blank or answers with a literal restatement, because the answer is not printed word-for-word in the text.
Candidates believe only explicitly stated information is safe, so they avoid drawing the conclusion the item rewards, and they run out of time on the longer texts where inference items cluster.
What to do instead
Rehearse the inference question types explicitly (purpose of writing, likely next action, attitude of the writer, meaning of an idiom in context) using short authentic texts, and require an answer plus a one-line Korean justification citing the phrase that supports it.
In Writing in Korean, the candidate produces a script-like response that answers the prompt in bullet points or short disconnected sentences rather than as a coherent text with an opening, developed ideas, and a closing appropriate to the text type.
Candidates confuse 'covering all the points' with 'writing a text'; they list content to avoid grammar risk and never plan the structure, so organisation and cohesion marks are lost even when the content is accurate.
What to do instead
Spend two minutes planning: identify the text type (email, diary, notice, letter, speech), write the required opening and closing formulas for that type, order the content points logically, and connect them with appropriate connectors (그래서, 그러나, 또한, 결국) before drafting.
In Writing in Korean, the candidate translates an English sentence structure word-for-word, producing unnatural Korean such as overusing 그/그녀, placing adjectives without conjugation, or writing 때문에 at the start of a sentence in formal prose.
Thinking in English and translating clause by clause feels efficient, but it produces grammar that Korean readers find foreign and that loses accuracy and range marks, especially with particles and honorific agreement.
What to do instead
Build a bank of Korean sentence patterns by function (opinion -다고 생각한다, cause -기 때문에, contrast -지만, suggestion -(으)시겠어요?) and practise rewriting English drafts into these patterns; after drafting, check particle choice, verb endings, and honorific consistency sentence by sentence.
In Writing in Korean, the candidate writes well below the required length, or pads to length by repeating the same idea in slightly different words.
Time is lost to planning and to rewriting sentences, so the response is short; when candidates notice, they repeat content instead of adding development, which costs marks for both content and range.
What to do instead
Practise timed writing to a target word count with a fixed structure (introduction, two developed body points with an example or reason each, conclusion), and prepare a small set of elaboration moves (giving a reason, an example, a personal experience, a contrast) to extend ideas legitimately.
In Writing in Korean, the candidate uses a single speech level inconsistently across the response, mixing 해요체 and 한다체 or using 반말 in a formal letter or notice.
Candidates focus on content and vocabulary under time pressure and treat ending choice as a minor detail, but register consistency is part of accuracy and appropriateness in the writing criteria and is highly visible to markers.
What to do instead
Decide the speech level from the text type and audience at the planning stage, write it at the top of the page as a reminder, and reserve the final minutes for a register check, reading each verb ending aloud to confirm it matches the chosen level.