다고 생각합니다 (Da-go Saenggak-hamnida): The TOPIK Writing Score Killer

The Phrase That Feels Safe — But Isn’t

In English academic writing, hedging is a virtue. “I think,” “I believe,” “It seems to me” — these phrases signal intellectual humility. Professors reward them. Writing handbooks teach them explicitly as marks of sophisticated argumentation.

Part of the TOPIK Prep — Strategy, Vocabulary, Schedule series — start there if you’re new.

So it makes complete sense to carry that instinct into TOPIK II 쓰기 sseu-gi. Every argument lands with the same careful phrase:

The phrase itself is not wrong. One use in a 700-character essay is completely fine. But three uses inside 200 words? The examiner stops reading your ideas and starts noticing a pattern — one that costs points across multiple scoring categories at once.

TOPIK Writing Tests a Genre, Not Just Korean Ability

Most learners approach TOPIK II 쓰기 sseu-gi by working on Korean language ability. Necessary — but not sufficient. Question 54 doesn’t just ask you to write Korean. It asks you to write in a specific Korean genre.

The two writing questions split by genre from the start. Question 53 is 설명문 seol-myeong-mun — an explanatory text, 200–300 characters. Question 54 is 논설문 non-seol-mun — a full argumentative essay, 600–700 characters. Separate genres. Separate scoring rubrics from line one.

논설문 non-seol-mun is the same essay form drilled in Korean middle and high school classrooms. In that tradition, stating your argument directly is not arrogance — it is the expected form. Structure itself demonstrates competence. A hedged topic sentence reads as an undeveloped argument.

This runs directly counter to English academic writing conventions. In English, “This suggests that…” signals awareness of complexity — your professor marks it as a strength. In Korean 논설문 non-seol-mun, that same move reads as unfocused thinking. Same instinct. Opposite signal. The collision is real, and it catches skilled writers off guard.

Three Ways One Phrase Signals Weakness at Once

TOPIK II 쓰기 Question 54 scores across three categories totalling 50 points:

Note: vocabulary and grammar are not separate line items. Both live inside 언어 사용 eon-eo sa-yong, which is worth more than half the question’s total points.

Overusing 다고 생각합니다 da-go saeng-ga-kam-ni-da hits the bottom two categories — three ways simultaneously.

1. 글의 전개 구조 geul-ui jeon-gae gu-jo — no visible structure. 논설문 non-seol-mun expects direct assertions: 해야 한다 hae-ya han-tta, ~이다 -i-da, 중요하다 jung-yo-ha-da. When every claim ends with “I think that,” the examiner cannot locate a clear main argument. A hedged topic sentence is structurally invisible.

2. 언어 사용 — vocabulary range. Repeating the exact same phrase signals a narrow vocabulary range. Three times in 200 words is the equivalent of writing the same English word six times in a single paragraph. The depth of your lexicon does not show.

3. 언어 사용 — register mismatch. This is the one most learners miss entirely. 다고 생각합니다 da-go saeng-ga-kam-ni-da ends in -습니다 -seub-ni-da — the formal spoken register, used in speeches and presentations. TOPIK 54 requires the formal written register, which ends in -다 -da. The moment -습니다 appears, the examiner sees a register mismatch before reading a single idea.

The Same Argument — Two Very Different Signals

Here are two versions of the same paragraph. Same argument. Same main point. Same approximate length. What changes is structure and register — and that is exactly what the examiner notices first.

Version A and Version B make the exact same argument. Version B shows genre fluency. Version A shows Korean ability — but signals unfamiliarity with this specific essay form. The examiner draws that conclusion before reading your ideas.

Practice: Drop the Crutch

Three over-hedged sentences below. Rewrite each one — remove 다고 생각합니다 da-go saeng-ga-kam-ni-da, switch to -다 -da formal written register, and vary vocabulary where you can.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is 논설문 (non-seol-mun) in TOPIK II writing?

논설문 non-seol-mun is the formal argumentative essay genre required for TOPIK II Question 54. It follows Korean school essay conventions: a direct main claim, logical supporting evidence, and a conclusion — all written in the -다 -da formal written register. Question 53 is a separate genre (설명문 seol-myeong-mun, explanatory text) with different form and different scoring expectations.

Why does 다고 생각합니다 (da-go saenggak-hamnida) lower TOPIK writing scores?

Three reasons at once. First, it hides your argument structure — examiners look for direct claims, and “I think that…” makes the main point invisible in 글의 전개 구조 geul-ui jeon-gae gu-jo scoring. Second, repeating it signals a narrow vocabulary range inside 언어 사용 eon-eo sa-yong, which is worth 26 of 50 points. Third, -습니다 -seub-ni-da is the formal spoken register — TOPIK 54 requires the formal written register (-다 -da), so the examiner sees a register mismatch before reading your content.

What verb endings should I use in TOPIK II Question 54 instead?

For assertions: -이다 -i-da, -해야 한다 -hae-ya han-da, -중요하다 -jung-yo-ha-da. For conclusions: 따라서 tta-ra-seo or 그러므로 geu-reo-meu-ro. Every one of these ends in -다 -da — the correct formal written register — and gives the examiner clear structural landmarks for 글의 전개 구조 geul-ui jeon-gae gu-jo points.

Genre Fluency Is Where the Score Gap Lives

TOPIK writing does not test whether you have opinions. It tests whether you can structure them inside 논설문 non-seol-mun — Korean formal argumentative writing — in the register that genre demands.

Dropping 다고 생각합니다 da-go saeng-ga-kam-ni-da is not about sounding cold or overconfident. It is about sending the structural signals the examiner is trained to find. The phrase costs points not because it is wrong — but because the pattern tells a story about form that you do not want your paper to tell.

If the -다 -da written register still feels unnatural, read a few paragraphs of Korean newspaper editorials or formal essays daily. The rhythm settles faster than any flashcard drill — and that rhythm is exactly what TOPIK 54 is listening for.