No, because unlike Singlish and Indian English, Konglish isn’t a variety of English. It’s a category of Korean vocabulary that is based on English or other European words and therefore students are more likely to transfer from Korean to English than purely Korean or Sino Korean words and expressions. Having taught multilingual classes, I can say for sure that Konglish and Japlish are considerable areas of misunderstanding when Japanese and Koreans try to communicate with people from almost anywhere. There are, however, times when the forms they try to use are more likely to be understood than forms based on native speaker models, e.g. using hand phone when talking to Germans, or using the Korean pron of sauna almost anywhere.

Most of that is in the intro, but as you’ve been kind enough to visit a few times, it’s understandable that you haven’t be rereading the piece each time.

The fact is, we have American English, British English, and Australian English because people from those countries took the language and made it their own. Since America has a different history and culture distinct from Great Britain, isn’t it natural that they would use the language differently?

Isn’t konglish, japlish, chinglish, and others, attempts by Asians to make English their own?

I say the reason “cell phone” is standard English whereas “hand phone” is not, has nothing to do with logic. It has everything to do with a whole bunch of people deciding that since they don’t personally say “hand phone” that it must be wrong.

I’m sure “oorai” started that way, but as it is only now used for parking (never as a general synonym of “okay”) and never has the final t, even in writing, I think it is very much Konglish and Japlish now

on another point–I wonder if some on the list are more matters of pronunciation or even slang than loanwords that have been reassigned a slightly different context. In this respect, expressions such as “wassup” or “a’riight” used by native speakers are not that different from “all ri.”

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/SF

SF:
1. science fiction.
2. sinking fund.

However, I think that as teachers we should endeavor to give students 100% accurate information. For example, my firefox extension tells me that in the last sentence, I misspelled endeavor. It says that I should spell it “endeavour”. Since I tend to make spelling mistakes sometimes I should check it. If I look it up on http://www.dictionary.com I see that I spelled it correctly. So, a flag was thrown (i.e. firefox underlined it) so I went to double check it rather than just assume that since I am a native speaker I must therefore be correct.

As far as “He done it.” that is a good example because I know of native speakers that might actually say something like that. The ones I know that would say something like that though, tend to be uneducated people living in the Appalachian areas of the United States. My standard for saying it’s wrong is, if these same people were to go to a university in that same area (West Virginia State University for example) they would probably be corrected by their English professor. So in the “endeavor” to be 100% accurate, I would tell students that an uneducated person from West Virginia might say that. But that most educated people AS FAR AS I KNOW, would consider it to be wrong.

I use the same principle for the word “ain’t”. I tell students that they might occasionally encounter that word in a pop song (which is why I might teach it). Or in the writings of Mark Twain (when he is imitating how the common person speaks). But that it is not considered to be correct English in academia.

The thing with SF though is, a few native speakers use it. And it’s not like “ain’t” where native speakers use it, but it is considered wrong by academia. SF is an example where a few native speakers use it AND it is used by academia as well as serious science fiction writers (such as Robert Heinlein). So even though the majority of people don’t use it, it is not “wrong”. In the endeavor to be 100% accurate it’s fair to point out that most people don’t know what SF is and that maybe students should repeat it saying “Sci. Fi.” if the person seems confused. Or if you want to make it easier for them, tell them it’s better to say “Sci. Fi.” because more people know what that is.

I am not 100% sure where SF came from in Korea, but it might have come from a few Koreans noticing that the best science fiction writers use it. I think that finding out what the best people in a native speaking society use, and trying to use it yourself, should be applauded rather than corrected.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/01/theyre_coming_for_us_my_fellow.php

Having said that, it’s debatable what is science fiction sometimes. Among serious SF people, Star Wars is not considered science fiction as it contains numerous errors (such as the Kessel run in 12 parsec quote).

The thing is, if very intelligent native speakers use SF (and I would consider a successful science fiction writer to be an intelligent native speaker) I feel myself hard pressed to justify correcting students by telling them to use Sci. Fi. instead. So am I to correct them on the basis that it is not “common speak”? After all, “common speak” includes words like “ain’t”. If I am supposed to teach based on how the “common man” speaks instead of how the best intellectuals speak, should I teach them to use “ain’t”? In fact, writers like Mark Twain use “ain’t”. If it’s good enough for Mark Twain, it’s good enough for my students right?