let me first say that this is a game that I would use in class no matter what the others are trying to detract from the actual meaning of Konglish. The basic idea is that the use of Konglish when speaking to a native speaker or traveling outside of Korea would in fact be wrong and would lead to misunderstanding. Proper usage of English is needed when they are older and work for companies that deal with English-speaking nations.
While it may seem alright not to correct students on a Konglish term because that is the name for it.... in Korean, it simply would not be understood by a person outside of Korea. That is the main point that I feel people are missing here.
This about the term "sharp" if you went to Canada or talked to an English-speaker in India and asked them for a "sharp" what do you think they would give you?
I'm not tryinh to belittle your efforts here, but we should be mindful of what it is we want Korean students to learn. Clearly, this PPT is designed to encourage American Standard English. Of course, this is one of the most 'well-known' standards in the EFL world. However, I just want to question whether or not it is our place to try and refute Korean Standard English a.k.a 'Konglish'? I would agree with matthews_world in so far that Koreans will always speak Konglish; and rightly so, Konglish is Korean Standard English.
Personally, I think it's best to teach English as an International Language (EIL). That is to say - US/UK/SA/Aus or other so called 'inner circle' Standard Englishes are not the benchmark for ESL/EFL learners to adopt. Firstly, how arrogant of us is this? Why shouldn't Koreans be allowed to develop their own unique version of English just as all of our native country's have? Telling Koreans that Konglish is fundamentally wrong, is well, fundamentally wrong.
How about adapting this PPT to be INCLUSIVE of the World Englishes/EIL perspective?
Final question - Who owns English? Is it the USA/UK or another nation? For me, it's whoever is using the language. If they are using it and their message is being understood - who are we to say, for exampe, 'cellphone' is right and 'handphone' is wrong? How about teaching both together?
If you look at this argument, it is also fundamentally wrong. If a Korean uses konglish to a native speaker that has no connection with Korea, more often than not they will not be understood. If you asked an EIL speaker for a "sharp" or complained that they were "cunning" no one would understand you. Thus, the entire point that you just made has failed.
Our role here, in many ways as teachers is to teach English as it is commonly used in our native homelands. If English is needed in the form of how Koreans use it and speak it, then we would not be needed at all. Therefore, if a student uses a term that is not the one commonly associated with the object to with they are referring to, then I will correct them. This is also what I believe the point of this game is.
Words like "sharp" in regards to a mechanical pencil or "skinship" used instead of "being close" or "touching" are indeed wrong and thus they are needed to be corrected. It is the same way that new words are not accepted en masse in the west.
For example, where I come from we used the term "wife-beater" for a sleeveless white undershirt. That horrible term became so popular that it was used on and in music etc. However, you would go to a store and see "wife-beaters on sale" nor would you ask the clerk "excuse me, do you know where I could find some wife-beaters?" Furthermore, if my kids used that term I would correct them as well.
It is not about "who owns English" or whatever acronym of English study you are trying to promote. It is about building a level of correct communication that is universally understood and konglish is not. Period.
