38 most error analyses use examination papers such as composition and etc. In this
research, the researcher utilized students’ worksheets.
E. Data Gathering Technique
The first data collection was taken by giving a material enrichment to the students. This material enrichment was designed by the researcher for obtaining
the primary data. This material enrichment would not affect the students’ marks.
The material enrichment also helped the students recall what they have learnt in the previous semester. This material enrichment was also aimed by the teacher as
a pre-lesson before the students carried on learning describing places. In this task, the students were required to write a descriptive text about people
’s appearance and character. As the final sequence of data gathering, the researcher collected all
the data: students’ worksheets. Afterwards, the researcher synthesized all the data in order to obtain a strong hypothesis using error analysis techniques
on students’ descriptive texts.
F. Data Analysis Technique
This research was based on a linguistic description. The data analysis technique was based on linguistic category taxonomy by Politzer and Ramirez,
1973 as cited by Dulay, et al 1982. In linguistic category taxonomy, Politzer and Ramirez, 1973 presented two basic linguistic categories: morphology and
syntax. The researcher also found other errors that could not be included in morphology and syntax. They are lexico-semantic errors and orthographic errors
39 by Keshavarz 2012 as cited by Abed 2012. Lexico-semantic and orthographic
errors were, then, known as other findings as they were still essential for this study.
Before classifying the errors, the researcher searched all sentences that contained errors from 55 students’ worksheets. After searching the sentences
containing errors, then, the error classification began. The sentences containing errors fr
om the students’ material enrichment were examined with linguistic category taxonomy by by Politzer and Ramirez, 1973 as cited by Dulay, et al
1982. The data was taken once. The error which was made by the students was, then, categorized into some aspects based on the linguistic category taxonomy.
The researcher also quantified the errors found in the students’ worksheets. The
researcher needed to quantify the frequency of errors because the quantification of errors defined the errors and mistakes as stated by Ellis 1994. The quantity of
errors also described the area of students’ difficulties. The quantified errors, then, were classified based on linguistic category taxonomy. The researcher classified
the errors into some specific error types based on linguistic category taxonomy. The example of the error classification table is presented below.
Table 3.2. The Error Classification Table
Error Error Category
Error Sentences
Syntax Morphology
Other Findings
Frequency 1
After classifying the errors, the researcher could analyze in which part they were facing the problem. Linguistic category taxonomy helps the researcher
40 pinpoint the errors found on students’ descriptive texts. The researcher also
presented other findings besides morphological errors and syntax errors. Lexical errors described all errors that occurred in words. Lexical errors were divided into
two categories. They are lexico-semantic and orthographic errors. Besides linguistic category taxonomy, the researcher also employed types of error by
Dulay et al 1982 such as omission, addition, substitution and etc to clearly explain the errors in students’ descriptive texts.
G. Research Procedure
