COHESIVE DEVICE IN ENGLISH TEXTS OF THE STATE EXAMINATION FOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN INDONESIA.

(1)

Cohesive Device in English Texts of the State Examination

for Senior High School Students in Indonesia

A THESIS

Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for the Degree of Magister Humaniora

By:

ERWINSYAH PUTRA SEMBIRING Registration Number: 8116111007

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

ABSTRACT

ERWINSYAH PUTRA SEMBIRING. Registration Number 8116111007. Cohesive Device in English Texts of the State Examination for Senior High School students in Indonesia. Postgraduate School of the State University of Medan, 2016.

This study is focused on cohesive devices in English texts of the state examination for high school in Indonesia. The aims of this study are to identify the types of cohesive devices used in relating sentences available in Texts. To find out the dominant types of cohesive devices used in the reading texts available in the texts. To find out the contexts which the cohesive device are used in the text. This research was conducted by using qualitative analytical descriptive method. The objects of the study were 25 English Texts State examinations for high school in 2010 until 2015. The data were the State examinations texts of reading section. The data were analyzed by using the theory of cohesive devices proposed by Halliday and Hasan in the book “cohesion in English”. The data were analysed by using qualitative content analysis. The research findings show that five types of cohesive devices containedin all the texts, namely: reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, and lexical cohesion. The result shows that the most dominant cohesive device is reference that is 321(44.8%) followed by conjuction that is 249(34.8%), lexical cohesion as many as 84(11.7%) , substitution as many as 54(7.5%) and the least was ellipsis as many as 7(0.9%), and the total cohesive devices found from 2010 to 2015 were 715. And after analyzing the context situation used in the text, three types were found, namely, field, tenor and mode and in specifically, field used the elements of arena or social activity, participant’s characteristics and semantic domain and in tenor found used three elements from four there were formality, status or power, affection. And in mode found used elements Planning, Distance, Involvement and medium or channel.

(6)

i ABSTRACT

Penelitian ini difokuskan pada pengunaan Kohesi( Kepautan Makna) pada teks bahasa Inggris di ujian nasional (UN) SMA di Indonesia. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengidentifikasi jenis-jenis kohesi yang digunakan dalam kalimat yang terdapat di Teks. Untuk mengetahui jenis-jenis kohesi yang paling dominan yang digunakan dalam teks bacaan yang terdapat di dalam teks. Untuk mengetahui konteks social secara kohesi yang digunakan didalam teks. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode deskriptif analitis kualitatif. Objek penelitian ini adalah 25 English Teks ujian nasional (UN) SMA dari tahun 2010 hingga 2015. Data dalam penelitian ini adalah teks pada bagian soal membaca . Data dianalisis dengan menggunakan teori kohesi menurut Halliday dan Hasan yang dikemukakan dalam bukunya” Cohesion in English”. Data analisis dengan menggunakan kualitatif konten analisis. Temuan penelitian menunjukan terdapat lima jenis kohesi yang terdapat di dalam teks, yaitu: perunjuk, substitusi, elipsis, konjungsi, dan kohesi leksikal. Hasil dari analisis yang dilakukan menunjukkan bahwa jenis kohesi yang paling dominan adalah perujuk (reference) 321 (44,8%) kemudian diikuti dengan conjuction 249 (34,8%), kohesi leksikal sebanyak 84 (11,7%), substitusi sebanyak 54 (7,5%) dan yang paling sedikit adalah elipsis sebanyak 7 (0,9%), dan jumlah keseluruhan analisis kohesi yang ditemukan dari tahun 2010 sampai dengan tahun 2015 adalah 715. Dan setelah menganalisis konteks situasi yang digunakan dalam teks. Hasilnya ditemukan tiga jenis konteks situasi, yaitu bidang, isi (field), pelibat (tenor) dan cara (mode) dan khusus, bidang isi (field) mencakup arena/ kegiatan, cirri pelibat dan ranah semantik dan pelibat (tenor) ditemukan tiga pegunaan pelibat dari empat yaoitu formalitas, status, afeksi. Dan cara (mode) ditemukan unsur yang digunakan mencakup keterencanaan, jarak, keterbabitan dan medium atau saluran.

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the name of Allah, the most gracious and the most merciful whom he would like to express his sincere gratitude, Allah the almighty who has given his blessing health, strength and patience in the process of completing this thesis as a partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree of the Postgraduate of English Applied Linguistics Program, State University of Medan.

This thesis would not also have been possible brought into existence without the help of a great many people. At first, in particular, the writer would like to express his gratitude to Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A.,Ph.D and Dr.Anni Holila Pulungan.M.Hum., his first and second advisers for their so generous assistance, guidance, advice, and precious time they spent on supervising and guiding this thesis.

Secondly, the writer would also like to express his gratitude to the head of English Applied Linguistics Program, Dr. Rahmad Husein, M.Ed. and his secretary, Dr.Anni Holila Pulungan.M.Hum and Farid who have assisted him in the process of administration requirement during the process of his study in the postgraduate program. Special thanks to the all lecturers of the English Applied Linguistics Program, State University of Medan who have given their valuable knowledge to his in their lectures.

The writer also would like to sincerely thank to anonymous participant who contributed suggestions, critics and advises to this study as reviewers and examiners, Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M.Pd., Dr. Syahron Lubis. M.A., and Dr. Zainuddin , M. Hum. For their appropriate and helpful commentaries and constructive suggestions.

My greatest and sincere thanks and never ending gratefulness are fully dedicated to my beloved parents, Alm. Polen Sembiring and Habsyah Siregar, for their endless love, patient and support in providing everything that make this possible to me. Special thanks is addressed to my beloved brothers, Fitra wahyudi Sembiring and Mhd, Habibi Sembiring, for their love, understanding and endless love though the duration of her studies.

(8)

Special thanks to my beloved wife and my son, Maulida Afriyani Lubis and Idraki Rashdansyah Sembiring for love, prayer, and support who patient spent time to finish my thesis.

Then, his gratitude goes to the students of LTBI A XX 2011, who had given him encouragement, experience and fun time altogether for the whole semesters. laugh and joy, the fun and pleasure together will always go beyond the academic experiences in writing this thesis, Rizal, Hiskia, Vidya, Pak Agus , Kak Yohana, Kak Sarifah and all of his colleagues are all valuable and inspiring when writing the thesis.

Lastly, he offers his regards and blessings to all of those who supported his any aspect during the completing this thesis. He confesses that he has done his most to accomplish this thesis but he realized it is still far from being perfect. Therefore, any constructive, criticisms, suggestions or comments will be highly appreciated

Medan, 18 June 2016 The writer,

Erwinsyah Putra Sembiring NIM. 8116111007

(9)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages

ABSTRACT………. i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……….. ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS……… iv

LIST OF TABLE ……… ix

LIST OF FIGURES………. x

LIST OF APPENDIX……….. xi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1The Background of the Study ... 1

1.2The Problems of the Study ... 5

1.3The Objective of the Study ... 5

1.4The Scope of Study... 6

1.5The Significance of the Study ... 7

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE ... 8

2.1. The theoretical Framework ... 8

2.1.1. The Nature of Language ... 8

2.1.2. Functional Grammar ... 9

2.1.3. Textual Function ... 11

2.1.4. Text ... 11

2.1.5. Social Context ... 13

1 Situation Context ... 14

a. Field ... 15

(10)

c. Mode ... 18

2.1.6. State Examination (UN) ... 20

2.1.7. Cohesion ... 22

2.1.8. Type of Cohesion ... 23

2.1.8.1. Reference ... 23

2.18.2. Substitution ... 25

2.1.8.3 Ellipsis ... 27

a. Nominal Ellipsis ... 29

b. Verbal Ellipsis ... 30

c. Clausal Ellipsis ... 31

2.1.8.4 Conjunction ... 32

a. Addictive ... 32

b. Adversative ... 33

c. Clausal ... 33

d. Temporal ... 33

2.1.8.5 Lexical Cohesion ... 35

a. Repetition ... 35

b. Synonymy ... 36

c. Antonym. ... 36

d. Hyponymy ... 37

e. Meronymy ... 38

f. Collocation ... 38

2.2. Relevant of the Study ... 39

(11)

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD ... 46

3.1 The Research Design ... 46

3.2 The Data and the Source of Data ... 47

3.3 The Technique of Data Collection ... 47

3.4. Instruments of Data Collection………. 48

3.5 The Technique of Data Analysis ... 48

3.6 The Trustwortiness of the Study ... 49

3.6.1 Credibility……….. 49

3.6.2 Transferability……….50

3.6.3 Dependability………. 50

3.6.4 Conformability………... 51

CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS……….. 53

4.1 Data Analysis ………. 53

4.1.1 Reference……….…. 54

4.1.2 Substitution………...………….. 55

4.1.3 Ellipsis………...……….. 56

4.1.4 Conjunction………..……….. 58

4.1.5 Lexical Cohesion ………...……. 59

4.2 Context situation used in cohesive devices ……… 61

4.3 Findings……… 62

4.4 Discussion………. 64

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS……… 66

(12)

vii

5.2 Suggestion……… 67 REFERENCE ……….. 68 APPENDIX………... 70

(13)

viii

LISTS OF TABLES

Table Pages

Table 4.1.1 Table Reference………... 54

Table 4.1.2 Table Substitution………. 55

Table 4.1.3 Table Ellipsis………. 57

Table 4.1.4 Table Conjunction………. 58

(14)

LISTS OF FIGURES

Pages Figure 2.1 Construal Social Contexts and Text………... 14 Figure 2.2 Stratified Social Contexts and Text………... 14 Figure 2.3 Conceptual frameworks Diagram……… 47

(15)

x LISTS OF APPENDIX

Pages

Appendix 1 Reference ………..………... 70

Appendix 2 Substitution ………..………... 85

Appendix 3 Ellipsis ……….. 100

Appendix 4 Conjunction……….. 114

Appendix 5 Lexical Cohesion ……… 129

Appendix 6 Context of Situation …..……….. 144

(16)

1 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1. The Background of the Study

The state examination is a formalization process, a setback and degrades the spirit of education. It is nothing more than a theater by the government in the name of state building and is extremely formalistic. But rejecting national exam merely based on the "government's failure" was not enough and not the appropriate way to solve problems related to education,

There are several factors that affect the level of comprehension of each text, such as the level of legibility of text, the level of the choose of topics and levels of choose that sentence can all affect a student’s understanding of a text, my assumption in the text UN are always that test every years have a readability level sufficient difficult to understand the level of legibility of text. Can be seen from the level of cohesion. Halliday and Hasan (1976:7) says “ the more cohesive devices used in the text the better the text will be." This is one important thing to help students understand the text, furthermore the social context is the choice of topic for the text, because my assumption that context which is general can be help the student in understanding the text compare topic artificial is still unfamiliar for students. So this study was designed to look at the existing level in about the UN and social context that is often applied in that context.

As one of the organizers of the UN in 2013, Chairman BNSP, Djemari Mardapi, asserted no objection if an audit carried out by other state institutions such as the BPK and KPK. He said it was important to improve education,

(17)

including the UN. Related to the formulation of a script about the UN, said Djemari depth study has been done and tested by experts and practitioners of education. Then, the UN supervision since a matter of scanning the answer sheets printed until the test results through computer devices. The supervision of the universities involved. Referring to the process Djemari sure of being tested this year had the same quality in each area although there are many variants of the manuscript. Then, when the examination takes place, the organizers already have a scenario that can be done when there obstacles in the implementation of the UN. For example, if there is a shortage about the steps taken as a matter of taking a backup, look for a similar problem at another school or copying questions. To minimize delays in packet about the school, the junior high level UN 2013 which starts on Monday (22/4), the distribution will be given priority to remote areas. "Previous (distribution about the UN high school level) preferred area of the city," he said.

The type of questions that tested in the state examination, especially senior high school was divided into 2 they are for IPA and IPA, for IPA are mathematic, Indonesian, English, biology, physics and chemistry, while for IPS are mathematic, Indonesian, English, economics, geography, sociology from 2 majors senior high school for about English and Indonesian were no differences between the majors IPA matter and IPS, so for question English IPA and IPS are same

This situation depict Indonesian state examination situation in general that the difficulty level of the text in the UN is different in each region of Indonesia implemented to prove the importance of the UN in order to do the mapping of the

(18)

central and regional levels of education in order to do the evaluation by government in terms of the quality of education in Indonesia.

However, the reality is contrary to the expectation. The students’ reading ability in secondary level, even in university level is still unsatisfactory. Some studies about reading ability were carried out in order to reveal the causative factors of low level of students’ reading ability. There are two main factors effect a reader’s ability, namely linguistics and non-linguistics factors. linguistics factors constitute grammatical aspects, vocabulary, background knowledge (schema) about the topic being read, ability to comprehend the text as a unity, awareness of the text organization, ability to apply the interactive reading process: top-down and button- up, etc. Non-linguistics factors, on the other hand, are effected by psychological and environmental aspects. The focus given to linguistics a factors in this study.

The success of teaching and learning at school is much endorsed by the use of good teaching materials in class (Nunan, 2003:8). Textbook is one of teaching materials that is used as the main resources of teaching and learning.

Cohesion as the binding component of word, phrase, and sentences in a text is considered to contribute to the quality the text UN Senior High School. A good text must be cohesively connected as to produce meaning. This statement is well explained by Martin (2007: 47) with an argument that the coherence, a clear meaning, is much influenced by cohesive devices and texture. Cohesion has often been neglected in language teaching where sentences have created, manipulated and assessed in isolation. it has been assumed that the students’ difficulties arise primary from lack of vocabulary or complexity of grammatical structure at

(19)

sentences level: whereas, difficulties can easily arise from problems with cohesion: findings the referent for a pronoun, for example, or recovering a phrase or clause lost thought ellipsis.

According to Halliday ( 1994: 311), cohesion refers to Relation within the text that are not subject to limitation; relations that may involved of any extent, both smaller and large than clauses, from single word to lengthy passages of text; and that may hold across gaps of any extent, both within the clause and beyond it, without regard to the nature of whatever intervene.

There are four cohesive devices in English, namely: by reference, ellipsis, conjunction and lexical organization. Reference is the meaning of a presupposing item, we have to refer to its presupposed item. For example, she is my sister. She refer to certain person, substitution is the replacement of an element by another element. Reference is built through semantic relation, but in substitution it is through grammar and linguistics form. For example: “who said that?” that is the substitution of” we are going to lose.” Ellipsis has the same function as substitution. The difference is in Ellipsis the presupposing item is deleted. For example “do you understand?” Andy asked “yes (I understand)” Bobby answered. The sentences “I understand “is omitted. Conjunction differs from the other four types of cohesion in a way that it does not refer to a certain element of presupposed item.

The existence of good text UN for Senior High School is inseparable with students’ achievement in their test result by their ability in reading. Reading is an important skill for students to absorb information from a text or a discourse. these skills can be equalized or even more than productive skills, writing and speaking,

(20)

with logical thinking that acquisition comes first , then production . a speaker or writer will be stuck when producing a speech or a text without sufficient information through reading .

Considering the fact above, the significance of the receptive skills, especially reading skills, especially reading skill is doubtless. It is reasonable that reading skill be made the core of learning language in English teaching. It is also expected that the learners are able to read a variety of reading texts, to increase mastery of vocabulary and grammatical feature of language as well. This thought is still relevant up to the present demand of learning English in Indonesia, which is based competence.

Thus, this study is an attempt to expose the use of Cohesive Devices which are applied in English reading Text of State Examination (UN), especially in reading section. Because Cohesion indicates the “non-structural text-forming relations” (Halliday and Hasan 1976: 7). It is means that the more cohesive devices used in the text the better the text will be.

1.2. The Problems of Study

This study attempts to expose the types of cohesive relation in the English text used by UN (State Examination) of Senior High School. The intended cohesive relations are those occurred between sentences in the Text. The research problem are stated as following.

1. What are the types of cohesive device found in the in the text UN English (state examination) in senior high school of 2010- 2015?

(21)

2. What is the dominant types of cohesive devices realized in the text UN English (state examination) in senior high school of 2010- 2015?

3. In what context is the cohesive devices used in the English reading texts of UN (state examination) in senior high school of 2010-2015?

1.3. The Objectives of the Study

Based on the problem of the study, the objectives of the research are

1. to identify the types of cohesive devices used in relating sentences available in Text UN English (state examination) in senior high school of 2010-2015

2. to find out the dominant types of cohesive devices used in the reading texts available in the text UN English (state examination) in senior high school of 2010- 2015 and

3. to find out the context which the cohesive device are used

1.4 The Scope of study

The study is focused on the analysis of English Subject of UN (States Examination) examination texts that purposefully select the reading sections of the test. The state examination test selection is senior high school from 2010-2015 sessions. The total numbers of reading test sections are 25 texts UN from years 2010-2015 and selected as the scope of the study.

English text is chooses because it has important role as a source of knowledge for the students of Junior High School in learning a language. Since there are a lot of text UN make by government every years.

(22)

1.5The Significance of the Study

The significant of study is generally to give great theoretical and practical contribution to researcher as well as teachers. Theerotically, The findings of this study are expected to be useful theoretically and practically in some respects:

1. Theoretically, the findings are expected to add up more horizons in theories of language evaluation, particularly that related to evaluates in large scale. In addition the findings can be references to further studies Cohesive. 2. Practically, the finding can be beneficial potentially for the student and

teachers in Senior High School level, will have knowledge about Cohesion especially in Text in UN and as materials for teachers English. And English teacher are in a good position to teach cohesion to the student for help the student understanding text in UN and help the student to pass the state examination and increase the value of students, especially the value of State Examination English. In additional the Government can improve the quality of the text in the state examination for Student High School, especially the quality of their attention on the matter of State Examination (UN) and the text quality in relation to cohesion use.

(23)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusion

Based on the findings and discussion, it can be concluded that:

1. It was found all cohesive devices used in whole text state examination (UN) from years 2010 until 2015 were namely: reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjuction and lexical cohesion

2. Based on the data the dominant types cohesive devices from text English state examination (UN) in years 2010 until 2015 were Reference 321(44.8%)

3. After analyzing 25 texts English state examination (UN) from years 2010 until 2015 with context situation conducted. Found that the context situation used in the texts were of three elements, namely, field, tenor and mode and in Specifically, field used the elements of arena or social activity , participant’s characteristics and semantic domain And in tenor found used three elements from four there were formality, status or power, affection. And in mode found used elements Planning, Distance, Involvement and medium or channel.

5.2 Suggestion

As what the researcher result shown that the analyzed cohesive device in texts English state examination (UN) from 2010 until 2015. Categorized cohesive good for students of senior high school, it is suggested that:

(24)

67 a. English texts used by the student in the class to learn how to produce good

and accepted sentences

b. English teacher and the headmaster can be involved in the process of learning English used texts as knowledge to teaching.

c. For the writer state examination is also expected to involve in controlling the quality of English Text state examination (UN) every years used in test UN. So the students can get knowledge from learning texts in order the student may understand the texts better

(25)

REFERENCE

Bloor, T and Bloor, M. 1995. The Functional Analysis of English: An Hallidayan Approach. Great Britain: Arnold.

Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. 1982. Qualitative Research for Education ( 2nd ed ). Boston: Allan and Bacon

Brown, G and Yule, G. 1983. Discourse Analysis . London : Cambridge University Press Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks:

Sage Publication

Gasson, S. (2004). Rigor in grounded theory research: An interpretive perspective on generating theory from qualitative field studies. In M. E. Whitman & A. B.

Woszczynski (Eds.), The handbook of information systems research (pp. 79–102). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Halliday, M. A. K and R. Hasan 1985. Context and Text: Aspects of Language in Social Semiotic Perspectives. Geelong: Deakin University Press

Hyland, K.2007.Genre and Second Language Writing, the USA: the University of Michigan Press.

Irwin,J.W. 1983. Understanding and Teaching Cohesion Comprehension. In J.W. Irwin (Ed.). Cohesion and Comprehension. A Research Review, (pp.31-34), Newark DE: International reading Association.

Lickie-Tarry, H.1995. Language and Context: A Functional Linguistics Theory of Register. London: Pinter

Lindsay, D.B.1985. Cohesion in the Composition of ESL and English Students, M.A. Thesis, University of California.

Martin, J.R. 2003. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, and H.E. Halminton (Eds.) Cohesion and Texture, (pp.35-53). The U.K: Blackwell Publishing.

Martin, J.R.1986. “Intervening in the Process of Writing Development”. Dalam Painter, C

and J.R. Martin(Editor) Writing to Mean: TeachingGenres Across the Curriculum. Applied Linguistics Association of Australia. Occasional Papers Number 9

(26)

Matthew B. Miles, & A. Michael Huberman. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage: London

Nunan, D. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.

Nuttal, C. 1982. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. London: Heinemann Education Books.

Purwoko, H. and Hendrarti, I.M.2004. Stepping Stone. Jakarta: Esis.

Patton, M. Q. (2005). Qualitative research. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd Richard.J.,Stone, R. and Shaw, S. 1985. Text and Texture. Sydney: Longman Samsuri, R.1987. Analisis Wacana. Jakarta: Binapura Aksara.

Saragih. A. 2005. Introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar. Unpublished. Medan: English Departement. State University of Medan

Saragih, A. 2009. Bahasa Dalam Konteks Sosial. Medan: Program Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Medan

Saragih.W. 1995. An Analysis of Cohesive devices Occuring in the English Textbooks for SMA. MA. Thesis. State University of Jakarta.

Scheider, R.1985. Cohesive Devices of Compositions written by Native Speaker. In D. Parker (ed.) Discourse Analysis, (pp.40-62). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Van De Velde, T.1989. An Analysis of Cohesion in Textbook. In L. Masson (Ed.)

(1)

2. What is the dominant types of cohesive devices realized in the text UN English (state examination) in senior high school of 2010- 2015?

3. In what context is the cohesive devices used in the English reading texts of UN (state examination) in senior high school of 2010-2015?

1.3. The Objectives of the Study

Based on the problem of the study, the objectives of the research are

1. to identify the types of cohesive devices used in relating sentences available in Text UN English (state examination) in senior high school of 2010-2015

2. to find out the dominant types of cohesive devices used in the reading texts available in the text UN English (state examination) in senior high school of 2010- 2015 and

3. to find out the context which the cohesive device are used

1.4 The Scope of study

(2)

1.5The Significance of the Study

(3)

66 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusion

Based on the findings and discussion, it can be concluded that:

1. It was found all cohesive devices used in whole text state examination (UN) from years 2010 until 2015 were namely: reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjuction and lexical cohesion

2. Based on the data the dominant types cohesive devices from text English state examination (UN) in years 2010 until 2015 were Reference 321(44.8%)

3. After analyzing 25 texts English state examination (UN) from years 2010 until 2015 with context situation conducted. Found that the context situation used in the texts were of three elements, namely, field, tenor and mode and in Specifically, field used the elements of arena or social activity , participant’s characteristics and semantic domain And in tenor found used three elements from four there were formality, status or power, affection. And in mode found used elements Planning, Distance, Involvement and medium or channel.

5.2 Suggestion

(4)

67 a. English texts used by the student in the class to learn how to produce good

and accepted sentences

b. English teacher and the headmaster can be involved in the process of learning English used texts as knowledge to teaching.

(5)

REFERENCE

Bloor, T and Bloor, M. 1995. The Functional Analysis of English: An Hallidayan Approach. Great Britain: Arnold.

Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. 1982. Qualitative Research for Education ( 2nd ed ). Boston: Allan and Bacon

Brown, G and Yule, G. 1983. Discourse Analysis . London : Cambridge University Press Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks:

Sage Publication

Gasson, S. (2004). Rigor in grounded theory research: An interpretive perspective on generating theory from qualitative field studies. In M. E. Whitman & A. B.

Woszczynski (Eds.), The handbook of information systems research (pp. 79–102). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Halliday, M. A. K and R. Hasan 1985. Context and Text: Aspects of Language in Social Semiotic Perspectives. Geelong: Deakin University Press

Hyland, K.2007.Genre and Second Language Writing, the USA: the University of Michigan Press.

Irwin,J.W. 1983. Understanding and Teaching Cohesion Comprehension. In J.W. Irwin (Ed.). Cohesion and Comprehension. A Research Review, (pp.31-34), Newark DE: International reading Association.

Lickie-Tarry, H.1995. Language and Context: A Functional Linguistics Theory of Register. London: Pinter

Lindsay, D.B.1985. Cohesion in the Composition of ESL and English Students, M.A. Thesis, University of California.

Martin, J.R. 2003. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, and H.E. Halminton (Eds.) Cohesion and Texture, (pp.35-53). The U.K: Blackwell Publishing.

Martin, J.R.1986. “Intervening in the Process of Writing Development”. Dalam Painter, C

and J.R. Martin(Editor) Writing to Mean: TeachingGenres Across the Curriculum. Applied Linguistics Association of Australia. Occasional Papers Number 9

(6)

Matthew B. Miles, & A. Michael Huberman. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage: London

Nunan, D. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.

Nuttal, C. 1982. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. London: Heinemann Education Books.

Purwoko, H. and Hendrarti, I.M.2004. Stepping Stone. Jakarta: Esis.

Patton, M. Q. (2005). Qualitative research. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd Richard.J.,Stone, R. and Shaw, S. 1985. Text and Texture. Sydney: Longman Samsuri, R.1987. Analisis Wacana. Jakarta: Binapura Aksara.

Saragih. A. 2005. Introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar. Unpublished. Medan: English Departement. State University of Medan

Saragih, A. 2009. Bahasa Dalam Konteks Sosial. Medan: Program Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Medan

Saragih.W. 1995. An Analysis of Cohesive devices Occuring in the English Textbooks for SMA. MA. Thesis. State University of Jakarta.

COHESIVE DEVICE IN ENGLISH TEXTS OF THE STATE EXAMINATION FOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN INDONESIA.