AN ERROR ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL FEATURES IN REPORT TEXT BY THE ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS OF ACCOUNTING MAJOR AT SMK N 1 JORLANG HATARAN.

(1)

AN ERROR ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL FEATURES IN

REPORT TEXT BY THE ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS OF

ACCOUNTING MAJOR AT SMK N 1 JORLANG HATARAN

A THESIS

Submitted as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

By:

NOMITA HERLINA MANURUNG

Registration Number 2113121050

ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

2017

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

i ABSTRACT

Manurung, Nomita Herlina. 2113121050. An Error Analysis of Grammatical Features in Report Text by the Eleventh Grade Students of Accounting Major at SMK N 1 Jorlang Hataran. A Thesis. Medan : English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan, 2017.

This study is purposed to describe the errors in grammatical features of report text. In addition, this study is also aimed to describe the possible causes of those errors. This study applied the descriptive qualitative approach of which the data were obtained from the report texts that were written by the eleventh grade students of accounting major in SMK N 1 Jorlang Hataran. The data were

collected by using students’ report texts and questionnaires. The data then were analyzed by identifying the errors first, then describing the errors, and the last explaining the errors. The errors that occurred in students’ texts are errors in verbs, sentences, prepositions, articles, agreements, pronouns, modifiers, and tenses. The result of the study indicates that the students made 541 grammatical errors which were classified into: 37,15% errors in verbs, 18,85% errors in noun, 15,15% errors in sentence, 11,27% errors in preposition, 7,76% errors in article, 4,06% errors in pronoun, 3,51% errors in modifier, and 2,21% errors in tenses.

The students’ errors were caused by 31,23% ignorance of grammatical rules, 28,09% incomplete application of rules, 15,89% false concept hypothesized, 13,86% interference of interlingual transfer, 9,05% wrong communication strategy, 1,84% over-generalization.

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The writer’s first gratitude goes to the Almighty Father in Heaven, Lord Jesus Christ, and Holy Spirit for providing the countless blessing, love and guidance to the writer. It is just another blessing from God to the writer so the writer can finish this final project, as the requirements to obtain the S1 Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan at English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan.

In the process of doing this thesis, many people have given their precious time, worthwhile support and motivation, and many kinds of thing. Therefore, the writer would like to express her gratitude and special thanks to :

 Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom. M.Pd., as the Rector of State University of Medan.

 Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., as the Dean of Faculty of Languages and Arts.

 Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., as the Head of English ad Literture Department.

 Dra. Meisuri, M.A., the Secretary of English Department.

 Nora Ronita Dewi, S.S., M. Hum., as the Head of English Education Study Program.

 Drs. Willem Saragih, Dipl.Appl., M.Pd., as her First Thesis Advisor  Johannes Jefria Gultom, S.Pd., M.Hum., as her Second Thesis Advisor  Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd., Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed.,

Rita Suswati, S.Pd, M.Hum., as her Thesis Reviewers.

 Eis Sri Wahyuningsih, M.Pd., the academic staff and adminitrative staff.  Pantes, the staff of English Education and Literature Department.

 Saut Siboro, the Head Master of SMK N 1 Jorlang Hataran, for his supports to the writer so the writer could do the research.

(8)

iii

 Her beloved parents, Manongar Manurung and Hotna Nurlita Damanik for giving love and prayers, for always listening to every jeremiad, for being so patient, and for always trying to make her happy, the writer’s special gratitude also goes to her dearest one and only sister, Mery Yusnila Manurung, for always understanding every single situation, and her brother, Thomson Wirabudi Sitorus, S.Pd, along with his wife and children, for the help for all of this time.

 Her other sisters Verawaty Sinaga, S.Pd., for never giving up to put faith, hope, and motivation to the writer, Aprillya Anastasya Haloho, S.Pd., for every cloudless moments.

 Her best of the best friends, especially Helena Siregar, S.Pd., Rostina Silalahi, S.Pd., Rismauli Aritonang, S.Pd., Putri Simbolon, for sharing the laughters and tears, for their continuous supports, and for giving good times and memories, Laura Elizabeth Hutapea, S.Pd., for teaching the goods of life, Raideni Kaloko, S.Pd., Lestari Veronika Manalu, Wike Wiranda Hutasoit, S.Si., Murni Naibaho, Novika Lbn.Gaol, Nurlenta Panjaitan for cheering up the writer.

The writer hopes this thesis will be useful and give positive impact for those who read it, especially, for the students of State University of Medan.

Medan, March 2017 The Writer,

Nomita Herlina Manurung Reg. No. 2113121050

(9)

TABLE OF CONTENT

ABSTRACT ... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... v

LIST OF TABLES ... viii

LIST OF APPENDICES ... ix

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1

A. Background of the Study ... 1

B. Problem of the Study ... 4

C. Objective of the Study ... 5

D. Scope of the Study ... 5

E. Significances of the Study ... 5

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE ... 7

A. Theoretical Framework ... 7

1. Grammar ... 7

2. Writing ... 8

3. Report Text ... 9

4. Error ... 12

5. Error Analysis ... 13

6. Causes of error ... 13

7. Types of Grammatical Errors ... 15

a. Sentence Error ... 16

b. Verb Error ... 19

c. Modifier Error ... 22

d. Preposition Error ... 24

e. Article Error ... 25

f. Noun Error ... 27

g. Pronoun Error ... 28

(10)

B. Relevant Studies ... 31

C. Conceptual Framework ... 36

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 38

A. Research Design ... 38

B. Subject of the Study ... 38

C. Instrument for Collecting Data ... 39

D. The Steps for Collecting Data ... 39

E. Analyzing Data ... 40

CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ... 42

A. The Data ... 42

B. Data Analysis ... 44

1. Types of Grammatical Error ... 44

a. Errors in verb ... 44

b. Errors in noun ... 46

c. Errors in sentences ... 47

d. Errors in preposition ... 49

e. Errors in article ... 50

f. Errors in pronoun ... 51

g. Errors in modifier ... 52

h. Errors in conjunction ... 53

2. Sources of Error ... 54

3. Causes of Errors from Students’ Perspectives ... 59

C. Findings ... 61

D. Discussion ... 62

CHAPTER V CLOSING ... 66

A. Conclusion ... 66

B. Suggestion ... 67

(11)

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1. The Percentage of the Eleventh Grade Students’ Score in Writing ... 2

Table 2.1. Explanation of active and passive voice ... 16

Table 4.1. Numbers of Students’ Grammatical Errors on Report Text ... 43

Table 4.2. Numbers and Percentage of Errors in Verb ... 44

Table 4.3. Numbers and Percentage of Errors in Noun ... 46

Table 4.4. Numbers and Percentage of Errors in Sentence ... 47

Table 4.5. Numbers and Percentage of Errors in Preposition ... 49

Table 4.6. Numbers and Percentage of Errors in Article ... 50

Table 4.7. Numbers and Percentage of Errors in Pronoun ... 51

Table 4.8. Numbers and Percentage of Errors in Modifier ... 52

Table 4.9. Numbers and Percentage of Errors in Conjunction ... 53

(12)

viii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Students’ Writing Test ... 71

Appendix B Students’ Report Text ... 72

Appendix C Types of Grammatical Errors in Students’ Report Text ... 77

Appendix D Occurences of Students’ Errors ... 95

Appendix E Sources of Students’ Errors ... 96

(13)

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A.Background of the Study

English as an International language has indirectly compelled Indonesian to learn it. English has become the dominant global language of communication, business, aviation, entertainment, diplomacy, and the internet. Over a billion people speak English as their second or foreign language (Leacock, 2010). Indonesian must learn English to be able to compete with other country. Owing to this, English is now one of main subjects in school, started from Elementary School, Junior High School, and Senior High School. There are four skills of English language which are learned in school, they are listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Harmer (2004) regarded writing as an important skill as he stated that being able to write is a vital skill for ‘speaker’ of a foreign language as much as for everyone using their own first language.

Knapp and Watkins (2005: 17) mention that there are two codes of writing: genres and grammar. Without these codes the process of writing can be frustrating and unproductive process. These codes help the students to know how to start their writing. However, for Indonesian students, these codes cause the students get more difficult to write instead. Genres can be defined as the classification of text according to their social purpose. Every genres are different in rules and organizations that then curtail the students to share their ideas freely on their writing. Just the same as genres, grammar is also considered as one

(14)

difficulty in producing English writing since English grammar is different with Indonesian rules. Grammar deals with the rules of using a language.

During the teaching practice in SMA N 1 Medang Deras, Batubara, it was found that most of the students faced difficulties in writing. The minimum criteria mastery (KKM or Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimum) was applied 75 meanwhile the students’ writing score were still low. The students’ accumulated score then become the preliminary data of this research as an evidence that Indonesian students’ writing skill is still low. The data can be seen in the following table.

Table 1.1.

The Percentage of the Eleventh Grade Students’ Score in Writing

1st semester >75 <75

XI-IA 1 12 students (41,37 %) 17 students (58,62 %) XI-IA 2 10 students (32,25%) 21 students (67,74 %) XI-IA 3 11 students (36,67 %) 19 students (63,33 %) XI-IA 4 11 students (37,93 %) 18 students (62,06 %) XI-IS 1 13 students (38,23 %) 21 students (61,76 %) XI-IS 2 7 students (20,58 %) 27 students (79,41 %) XI-IS 3 8 students (24,24 %) 25 students (75,75 %)

Source: The students’ accumulated score of the eleventh grade students at SMA

Negeri 1 Medang Deras academic year 2014/2015.

It can be seen from the table that most of students’ score percentage was under the KKM. The low score was caused by the students failed to write grammatically. In assessing students’ writing product, grammar becomes one aspect to be concerned. For this reason, writing and grammar become aspects of English which cannot be separated. To produce a good writing, students need to pay attention to the grammatical features of the text. Grammatical features are the important aspects that stick up with writing. In report text, the grammatical

(15)

features include the use of present tense, passive voice, action verbs, generalized pronouns, adjectives, and adverbs.

Nevertheless, there are still many grammatical errors in students’ writing product. The errors are various, for instances, the use of wrong tense, subject-verb agreement error, misplacing of adjectives and adverbs, and so on. Language usages in Bahasa are different from English usages. Students have been accustomed to use Indonesian usages, then they tend to write English sentence in Indonesian style. Although this may be true, it does not mean that the students’ errors in writing are acceptable. Their errors in writing must be corrected in order to make them realize their fault and know what are right. To master the English subject, it is important for the students to understand the correct form of grammar. Another purpose of this correction is to make them not to do the same errors henceforth.

The syllabus of the 2013 Curriculum determines that report text is one writing genre that is learned by the eleventh grade students of senior high school. Reports are written about living things and non-living things in general. As the accomplishment of English subject, students are assigned to build a report text on their own.

Hence, this study analyzes what types of grammatical errors the students made in writing report text. According to Eastwood (2002), there are three grammatical units of English; they are words, phrases, and sentences. However, this study focuses on errors of the grammatical units on report text only. The word classes that are analyzed in this study are verbs, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions,

(16)

articles, and pronouns. The main errors that are concerned is related to the missing words, wrong choice of words and the unclear use of those word classes. Additionally, this study also analyzes the errors in kinds of phrase such as verb phrase, adjective phrase, adverb phrase and prepositional phrase. Moreover, this study does not only discuss about the use of words and phrases, but also the relationship among sentence elements. It includes the form of the sentence, the arrangement of the words order, and the agreement between subject and verb or pronoun and antecedent.

By analyzing the types of students’ grammatical errors on their report text, the students’ weaknesses in learning grammar will be discovered. The students’ weaknesses are seen from the most frequent error of grammatical units they make. Moreover, this study is conducted to find out why students make errors in their writing product. In other words, this study analyzes the possible factors that can cause students’ errors. It is expected that the result of this study will help teachers to see their students’ development in learning English. Teachers will be able to find better ways to develop their learning in English subject.

B.The Problems of the Study

Based on the rationale above, the problems of the study are formulated as follows:

1) What types of grammatical errors are mostly found in report text of the eleventh grade students of accounting major at SMK N 1 Jorlang Hataran? 2) What are the causes of grammatical errors in report text by the eleventh

(17)

C.The Objectives of the Study

The study was intended to find out the most dominant grammatical errors that occur in report texts written by the eleventh grade of accounting major at SMK N 1 Jorlang Hataran. Another objective of this study was to find out the possible causes of the errors that occur in their report texts.

D.The Scope of the Study

In order to give the best result of the research, this study focused on analysing the grammatical errors in Report text. The grammatical types of errors that are discussed in this study are extended from the missing, wrong and unclear use of grammatical units. Then the main concern in this study is limited only on sentence errors, tense errors, verb errors, agreement errors, modifier errors, preposition errors, and articles errors. The subject of the study is limited on the eleventh grade of Vocational Senior High School students.

E.The Significances of the Study

It is expected that the finding of this study will later be useful for proper parties, such as the following.

1) To the teachers

It is expected that this study will help the teachers to foreknow students’ common errors in grammar related to report text and try to find better way of teaching in order to make the students understand authentically.

(18)

2) To the students

This study is expected to make the students understand their errors in writing through this study. By knowing their errors, it is expected that in the future they will learn more and try to improve their writing skill and grammar ability.

3) To the further researcher

This study is also expected to be useful for those who want to do similar research. It is expected that this study will be helpful as a guidance and reference for further research.

(19)

67 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

A. Conclusion

This study has discussed the analysis of errors in grammatical features of Report text. The data were taken from the eleventh grade students of accounting major. Based on the description of the results in the previous chapters, there are some conclusions that can be presented.

1) The errors of grammatical features in Report text are errors in verbs, nouns, sentences, prepositions, articles, pronouns, modifiers, and conjunctions.

Table 5.1. The Amount and Percentage of Types of Error No. Types of Grammatical

Error Amount Percentage

1. Error in verb 201 37,15%

2. Error in noun 102 18,85%

3. Error in sentence 82 15,15%

4. Error in preposition 61 11,27%

5. Error in article 42 7,76%

6. Error in pronoun 22 4,06%

7. Error in modifier 19 3,51%

8. Error in conjunction 12 2,21%

TOTAL 541 100%

2) The sources of students’ errors are the ignorance of rule restriction, incomplete applications of rules, negative interlingual transfer, false concept hypothesized, wrong communication strategy, and over-generalization.

(20)

3) The causes of students’ errors are the lack of knowledge, laziness, difficulty in dealing with grammar rules, lack of vocabularies, dislikeness of English subject, difficulty in building sentence, difficulty in translating, and lack of attention of teacher’s explanation.

B. Suggestion

There have to be suggestions as response to the conclusions above so that this study can be meaningful. Therefore, the following are some suggestions that are expected to be helpful for teachers, students, and other researchers.

1. For the teachers

Teachers must correct the students’ errors on their assignments then return them back to the students so they know their errors and learn at home. In addition, teachers must find the easiest way to make the students understand grammar.

2. For the students

Students must pay more attention when teachers explain. Students also must be aware to learn their errors at home to avoid repeating the same errors.

3. For the further researchers

Other researchers should conduct further studies on grammatical features of every genre of text that involve a wider circle of participants from every grade and level.

(21)

69 REFERENCES

Afifuddin. 2016. An Analysis of Students’ Errors in Writing Descriptive Texts. Vol. 07 (01). English Education Journal (EEJ)

Agustina, T. 2016. Error Analysis in Writing Recount Text. Vol. 03 (01). Surakarta: JoLLIET Education Journal of Muhammadiyah University Ary, D. et al. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education: Eighth Edition.

Canada: Wadsworth Cengage Learning

Astuti, D. S. 2014. English Grammatical Errors Made by First Grade Students of SMP N 1 Lasem Academic Year 2012/2013. Vol. 03 (01). LANTERN (Journal on English Language, Culture and Literature)

Brown, D. 2007. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Bruce, I. 2008. Academic Writing and Genre: A Systematic Analysis. London: Continuum

Burns, A. 1999. Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Carroll, J.C. et al. 2001. Writing and Grammar: Communication in Action. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Coffin, C. et al. 2003. Teaching Academic Writing: A Toolkit for Higher Education. London: Roudledge

Eastwood, J. 2002. Oxford Guide to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press Inc.

Ellis, R. 2003. Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press Fraenkel and W. 2006. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, Sixth

Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Gass, S. M. and Selinker, L. 2008. Second Language Acquisition : An Introductory Course. New York: Routledge 270 Madison Avenue

Gelderen, E. v. 2010. An introduction to the grammar of English. Philadelphia: John Benjamins North America Publishing Co.

Hughes, I and Hase, T. 2010. Measurements and their Uncertainties: A Practical Guide to Modern Error Analysis. NewYork : Oxford University Press Inc.

Jabeen, A. et. al. 2015. The Role of Error Analysis in Teaching and Learning of Second and Foreign Language. Vol. 01 (02). Macrothink Institute

(22)

Jesperson, O. 2006. Essentials of English Grammar. London: George Allan & Unwin Ltd

Khanom, H. 2014. Error Analysis in the Writing Tasks of Higher Secondary Level Students of Bangladesh. Vol. 02 (01). GSTF International Journal on Education

Knapp, P and Watkins, M. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar: Technologies for Teaching and Assessing Writing. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.

Lasaten, R. C. S. 2014. Analysis Of Errors In The English Writings Of Teacher Education Students. Vol 05 (04). Online: www.researchersworld.com

accessed in February 20th, 2017

Leacock, C. et al. 2010. Automated Grammatical Error Detection for Language Learners. Toronto: Morgan&Claypool

Mabuan, R. A. 2015. An Analysis of Weblogs’ Grammatical Errors of Filipino Learners of English as Second Language. Vol 03. DLSU Research Congress

Murphy, R. 2004. English Grammar in Use: Third Edition. Singapore: Cambridge University Press

Nonkukhetkhong, K. 2013. Grammatical Error Analysis of the First Year English Major Students, Udon Thani Rajabhat University. The International Academic Forum. website: www.iafor.org accessed on February 2017 Omidipour, M. 2014. An Analysis of Errors in Writing among Adult Persian

Learners of English. Vol. 05 (03). Online: www.ijllalw.org accessed in February 20th, 2017

Phuket, P. R. 2015. Understanding EFL Students’ Errors in Writing. Vol. 06 (32). Journal of Education and Practice. Online: www.iiste.org accessed on February 2017

Purwati, T. 2011. Error Analysis on Students’ Writing. Vol.05 (01). Purwokerto: LEKSIKA Education Journal of Jenderal Soedirman University

Rahmayanti, A. et.al. 2013. Syintactical Error Analysis of Descriptive Paragraph Writing Made by the Seventh Grade Students at SMP 4 Genteng in the 2011/2012 Academic Years. Vol. 02 (03). Pancaran Pendidikan FKIP UNEJ

Saad, M. A. H. 2014. Error Analysis in Role-play Presentations among Less Proficient L2 Malaysian Learners. Vol. 03 (03). International Journal of English and Education

(23)

Sugeng, B. dan Hendriwanto. 2013. An Analysis of the Grammatical Errors in the Narrative Writing of the first grade students of SMA 6 Yogyakarta. Vol. 06 (01). Journal of Education

Teschner, R. V. and Evans, E. E. 2007. Analyzing the grammar of English. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press

Thomas, J. 2014. Case Study Of Error Analysis Of The Usage Of Tense In English By I Year Engineering Students From Tamil Medium Schools. Vol. 02 (03). Impact Journals, online: www.impactjournals.us accessed in February 20th, 2017

Ur, P. 2006. Grammar Practice Activities: A Practical Guide for Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Yuliani, S, et.al. 2015. An Error Analysis of Descriptive Text Written by Junior High School Students in Surakarta. Vol. 02 (01). JoLLIET Education Journal

(1)

2) To the students

3) To the further researcher

This study is also expected to be useful for those who want to do similar research. It is expected that this study will be helpful as a guidance and reference for further research.

(2)

67 A. Conclusion

1) The errors of grammatical features in Report text are errors in verbs, nouns, sentences, prepositions, articles, pronouns, modifiers, and conjunctions.

Table 5.1. The Amount and Percentage of Types of Error No. Types of Grammatical

Error Amount Percentage

1. Error in verb 201 37,15%

2. Error in noun 102 18,85%

3. Error in sentence 82 15,15%

4. Error in preposition 61 11,27%

5. Error in article 42 7,76%

6. Error in pronoun 22 4,06%

7. Error in modifier 19 3,51%

8. Error in conjunction 12 2,21%

TOTAL 541 100%

(3)

B. Suggestion

1. For the teachers

2. For the students

Students must pay more attention when teachers explain. Students also must be aware to learn their errors at home to avoid repeating the same errors.

3. For the further researchers

Other researchers should conduct further studies on grammatical features of every genre of text that involve a wider circle of participants from every grade and level.

(4)

Surakarta: JoLLIET Education Journal of Muhammadiyah University Ary, D. et al. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education: Eighth Edition.

Canada: Wadsworth Cengage Learning

Astuti, D. S. 2014. English Grammatical Errors Made by First Grade Students of

SMP N 1 Lasem Academic Year 2012/2013. Vol. 03 (01). LANTERN

(Journal on English Language, Culture and Literature)

Brown, D. 2007. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Bruce, I. 2008. Academic Writing and Genre: A Systematic Analysis. London: Continuum

Burns, A. 1999. Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Carroll, J.C. et al. 2001. Writing and Grammar: Communication in Action. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Coffin, C. et al. 2003. Teaching Academic Writing: A Toolkit for Higher

Education. London: Roudledge

Eastwood, J. 2002. Oxford Guide to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press Inc.

Ellis, R. 2003. Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press Fraenkel and W. 2006. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, Sixth

Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Gass, S. M. and Selinker, L. 2008. Second Language Acquisition : An

Introductory Course. New York: Routledge 270 Madison Avenue

Gelderen, E. v. 2010. An introduction to the grammar of English. Philadelphia: John Benjamins North America Publishing Co.

Hughes, I and Hase, T. 2010. Measurements and their Uncertainties: A Practical

Guide to Modern Error Analysis. NewYork : Oxford University Press

Inc.

Jabeen, A. et. al. 2015. The Role of Error Analysis in Teaching and Learning of

(5)

Jesperson, O. 2006. Essentials of English Grammar. London: George Allan & Unwin Ltd

Khanom, H. 2014. Error Analysis in the Writing Tasks of Higher Secondary Level

Students of Bangladesh. Vol. 02 (01). GSTF International Journal on

Education

Knapp, P and Watkins, M. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar: Technologies for

Teaching and Assessing Writing. Sydney: University of New South

Wales Press Ltd.

Lasaten, R. C. S. 2014. Analysis Of Errors In The English Writings Of Teacher

Education Students. Vol 05 (04). Online: www.researchersworld.com

accessed in February 20th, 2017

Leacock, C. et al. 2010. Automated Grammatical Error Detection for Language

Learners. Toronto: Morgan&Claypool

Mabuan, R. A. 2015. An Analysis of Weblogs’ Grammatical Errors of Filipino

Learners of English as Second Language. Vol 03. DLSU Research

Congress

Murphy, R. 2004. English Grammar in Use: Third Edition. Singapore: Cambridge University Press

Nonkukhetkhong, K. 2013. Grammatical Error Analysis of the First Year English

Major Students, Udon Thani Rajabhat University. The International

Academic Forum. website: www.iafor.org accessed on February 2017 Omidipour, M. 2014. An Analysis of Errors in Writing among Adult Persian

Learners of English. Vol. 05 (03). Online: www.ijllalw.org accessed in February 20th, 2017

Phuket, P. R. 2015. Understanding EFL Students’ Errors in Writing. Vol. 06 (32). Journal of Education and Practice. Online: www.iiste.org accessed on February 2017

Purwati, T. 2011. Error Analysis on Students’ Writing. Vol.05 (01). Purwokerto:

LEKSIKA Education Journal of Jenderal Soedirman University

Rahmayanti, A. et.al. 2013. Syintactical Error Analysis of Descriptive Paragraph

Writing Made by the Seventh Grade Students at SMP 4 Genteng in the 2011/2012 Academic Years. Vol. 02 (03). Pancaran Pendidikan FKIP

UNEJ

Saad, M. A. H. 2014. Error Analysis in Role-play Presentations among Less

Proficient L2 Malaysian Learners. Vol. 03 (03). International Journal of

(6)

Sugeng, B. dan Hendriwanto. 2013. An Analysis of the Grammatical Errors in the

Narrative Writing of the first grade students of SMA 6 Yogyakarta. Vol.

06 (01). Journal of Education

Teschner, R. V. and Evans, E. E. 2007. Analyzing the grammar of English. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press

Thomas, J. 2014. Case Study Of Error Analysis Of The Usage Of Tense In English

By I Year Engineering Students From Tamil Medium Schools. Vol. 02

(03). Impact Journals, online: www.impactjournals.us accessed in February 20th, 2017

Ur, P. 2006. Grammar Practice Activities: A Practical Guide for Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Yuliani, S, et.al. 2015. An Error Analysis of Descriptive Text Written by Junior

High School Students in Surakarta. Vol. 02 (01). JoLLIET Education

AN ERROR ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL FEATURES IN REPORT TEXT BY THE ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS OF ACCOUNTING MAJOR AT SMK N 1 JORLANG HATARAN.