74 authentic, writing context. They included incorrect parallel structures and totally
ungrammatical sentences.
a. Incorrect parallel structures
One use of conjunction is to connect words or phrases that have the same grammatical function in a sentence. A conjunction can also connect two clauses.
In the following examples, we could observe that the conjunction and was used to
connect clauses. 1 Original
: Using formal language with your equals might give them the impression that you are better than them and no equality between
you. Corrected : Using formal language with your equals might give them the
impression that you are better than them and that there is no equality between you and your equals.
2 Original : Based on the tenth table, the participants did not feel that they
saw themselves as a rebel and seems like people from the “working class” when they were using non-standard language.
Corrected : Based on the tenth table, it could be seen that the participants
did not feel that they saw themselves as a rebel and that they seems seemed like people from the “working class” when they
were using non-standard language.
From the interview result, the writer obtained the fact the interviewee who made
errors in paralleling clauses had difficulty
to identify the
ungrammaticalities. Yet, this interviewee could easily correct the error in paralleling phrases. It indicated that she did understand the parallelism concept, in
fact.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
75
b. Totally ungrammatical – confusing ideas
Students’ preference to write relatively long sentences, sometimes, also led to confusing sentences at all due to the fact that the whole sentences were totally
ungrammatical. Deviations in meaning could no longer be avoided. It could obviously be seen in the examples that follow.
1 Original : Although they are good in writing, reading and listening but
their speaking is not good; it is not sufficient for them. Corrected
: Although If their speaking is not good, the fact that they are good in writing, reading and listening, but their speaking is not
good, it is not sufficient for them.
2 Original : They would forget their other activities, tired if too much play,
and would make them became lazy to study. Corrected
: They would forget their other activities, becoming tired if too much playing too much, and which would make them became
become lazy reluctant to study.
3 Original : The activity in the class also different with other lecturer but
that usually very serious, in this class is not really strict in the learning activity but the main point that the student might got
the point of the lesson they said.
Corrected : The activity in the class was also different with from other
lecturers’, but that which were usually very serious. In this class, the learning activity is was not really strict in the
learning activity but as the main point was that the student might got the point of the lesson, they said.
4 Original : The important points is there is no connection between they
like reading novel and they would get the beneficial, but all of the respondents got benefits although they felt uncomfort or
dislike reading novel.
Corrected : The important points is was that even though there is was no
connection between the fact that they liked reading novel and the possibility that
they would get the beneficial benefits, but it was proved that
all of the respondents got benefits although they
felt uncomfortable with or disliked reading novel.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
76 Actually, the existences of such totally ungrammatical sentences as well as
complicated parallel structures within sentences were strongly related to the fact that very frequently, those sentences were just too long. The writers of the
sentences did not focus on the meaning of their sentences as a whole. On the contrary, they made a clause related to the clause that follows, then, that clause to
another clause that follows and so forth. At the end, they did not notice that the first clause did not have any relation to the last, or that there might not be any
relation between the independent clause and one or more of the dependent clauses. The whole idea of the sentences became ambiguous, at the end. Based on the
writer’s analysis on the documents, furthermore, the writer often found out that many incorrect complex sentences in all four types had better be made into more
than one sentence. Such running-on sentences were frequently found in students’ research
reports. And when the students came to write such long complex sentences, most of which in multiple clause structure, they made series of errors, including such
basic errors as dangling verbal, double finite verbs, S-V agreement violations, and verb omissions.
Dealing with difficulties that the students faced in learning complex sentences, the selected interviewees said some facts, which were exactly the same
with this study’s findings on the grammatical problems they had. The interviewees said that they had difficulties in combining ideas in complex
sentences. When certain ideas were combined with others, the whole idea of the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
77 sentence became very confusing, said one of them. It matched with the findings
that revealed so many running-on sentences with ambiguous meaning. Some interviewees, furthermore, told that they had difficulty in determining
which subordinator to use in their sentences. This interview finding explained the reason why the students often erred in using appropriate subordinators. Besides, it
also explained why they made incorrect type of dependent clause, making an adverb clause when what they had to write was a noun clause, for instance. This
precedent could clearly be observed through the table of ungrammaticalities presented in the appendices. It could be seen that what were supposed to be
written in certain type of dependent clause were written in another one, instead. Another finding about the learning difficulty was that the students still had
difficulties in recognizing as well as producing non-finite clause. This problem often emerged in the case of adjective phrase and adverb phrase. To produce
sentences containing either an adjective phrase or adverb phrase, one would deal much with how to avoid dangling verbal, which was one of the most frequent
errors found in the students’ reports. Then, that the document analysis revealed a finding that most of students’
errors in producing multiple clause structures were errors in adjective clause parts was confirmed through the interview. The majority of the interviewees said that
adjective clause was the most difficult, with adverb clause and noun clause following in the second and third respectively.
All interviewees, furthermore, suggested have more and more exercise to do to improve their comprehension on complex sentences. Yet, some emphasized
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
78 that the exercise should be made contextual, like analysing students’ incorrect
sentences, which they themselves had written. According to the writer, then, learning language structure is a matter of
practise. Through deliberate practise in an ongoing process, one can master the structure by product. In other words, the students do not necessarily need to know
series of technical terms. They need to be able to use appropriate structures, regardless of whether they know the technical name, in appropriate context.
In other words, Structure should not be learnt in isolation. It must be learnt based on context. And so, should Structure be taught explicitly, the models or
exercises given should be those close to the students’ needs. Analysing errors the students themselves make can be one of the implementation of this learning.
What is more, that the findings of this study revealed that the students much more frequently wrote sentences containing multiple clause structure rather than
the basic three types should also be taken into consideration. Therefore, in teaching complex sentences, teachers are to pay more attention to students’
comprehension on multiple clause structure than the basic three types of complex sentences in isolation.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
79
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter will present the ultimate conclusion of the study as well as the recommendation from the writer in regards with the findings of the study.
Therefore, this very final chapter consists of two subchapters, conclusion and recommendations.
A. Conclusion
From the results of this study, some important points can be concluded. The first dealt with the students’ mastery of complex sentences type one, type two,
type three, and type four. The second, then, dealt with students’ problems in producing complex sentences.
First of all, it was found out that among four types of sentences, complex sentences were the most written sentences in students’ research reports. Complex
sentences type four, containing multiple clause structure, became the most written complex sentences compared to the three basic types of complex sentences.
Students’ mastery on complex sentences type one, type two, and type three could be considered as sufficient. It could be seen from the range of the overall
mastery, from 70 up to 80. Even though some students still obtained lower results than the average, they were considered minority compared to those obtaining
better results.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
