学生在习得第二语言的过程中会出现各种偏误，而产生这些偏误的因素很多，其中一个便是母语负迁移。鲁健骥（1999）为，从学生学习策略的角度来看，产生语法偏误的来源主要有两种：一是母语干扰；二是已经掌握但不完全的汉语知识对新的语法现象的干扰。尤其当第二语言与学习者母语在表达相同或相近的语义所使用的语法范畴不同时，学习者如果只有母语的语言知识就很难掌握第二语言的语法特点。韩国学生在学习汉语助词“了”时，就明显地存在这个问题。汉语语法学界汉语本体研究对助词“了1”的主流看法是表示动作的完成或实现，“了2”表示新情况的出现或变化。目前对外汉语教学领域也认同这一看法。但是，韩语语尾“-았-、-었-”有时与汉语助词“了1”相近，表示动作的完成或实现，有时却不跟“了1”对应，而只表示动作或状态发生在过去，所以韩国学生即使到了高级水平，他们使用“了”的偏误率还是很高。为了解决这样的问题，本文在前人研究成果的基础上，先从语法功能和意义上对汉语助词“了1” 与韩语语尾“-았-、-었-”作详细的比较，然后借助北京语言大学的“HSK动态作文语料库”中的语料来分析韩国学生使用“了1”的偏误类型及偏误产生的原因，从而揭示汉语助词“了1”与韩语语尾“-았-、-었-”之间存在的相关性。 本文的主要目的在于通过考察汉语与韩语之间对过去的动作或状态不同的表达方式，使韩国学生充分认识到汉语助词“了1”与韩语语尾“-았-、-었-”的异同点，提高使用汉语助词“了1”的正确率。此外，本文研究也可以为对外汉语教学提供一些参考 ，对外汉语老师通过预知韩国学生在使用“了1”时容易出现的错误，就可以有针对性地纠正和减少学生的偏误，从而达到良好的教学效果。

There are many reasons why students of a second language (L2) make errors, one of which is negative transfer from a student’s first language (L1). Lu Jianji (1999) has said that, from the perspective of a student’s learning strategy, there are two factors that cause grammatical errors: oneis L1 interference, and the other oneis interference arising from the application of previously learned but incomplete knowledge of the target language to a new grammatical phenomenon.Learners will find mastering a second grammar difficult especially when the temporal system of L2 is different from L1. This problem is very evident when Korean learners of Chinese language encounter the particle “-le” (了). The prevailing view of Chinese grammar research holds that “-le1” indicates a completed or realized action, while “-le2” indicates the arrival of a new situation, which the world of teaching Chinese as a second language generally accepts. The Korean suffixes“-았-、-었-”, however, sometimes match the use of “-le1” as a completed action indicator, and other times act only as an indication that the action or situation occurred in the past, leading to high misusage of “-le1” even among advanced Korean learners.To address this issue, this research builds on the foundations of previous research to assemble a detailed comparison, both functionally and semantically, of the Chinese particle “-le1” and the Korean suffixes “-았-、-었-”, followed by an analysis and categorization of the errors involving “-le1” contained in the BLCU corpus of HSK essays written by Korean students, thus forming a better understanding of the relationship between “-le1” and “-았-、-었-”.Through an investigation of the ways in which one idea is expressed in two different languages, this research aims to help Korean students better understand the essential similarities and differences between “-le1” and “-았-、-었-” and thus use “-le1” more correctly. The results of this investigation will also be useful to Chinese language educators who, through anticipation and thoughtful correction of “-le1” errors from Korean learners, will be able to achieve better results in their own classrooms.