From the list above, it could be said that actually the respondents knew about the idea of subject-verb concord but in some circumstances they did not
apply it because they were inconsistent. In fact it is interesting to know that in a compound sentence respondent E
formed the verbs in two ways. The first clause had incorrect subject-verb agreement but the second clause had correct subject-verb concord. The sentence is
as follow.
131 And then she change into the statue and becomes the biggest ...
temple in the middle, the Siwa temple. E 23
That sentence had one subject, two clauses, and two verbs which were “change” and “become”. In this sentence the respondent was inconsistent because
once he could produce the clause correctly “she becomes the biggest temple in
the middle”, but once he could not produce the other clause correctly “she
change into the statue”.
5. Misuse of Coordinator
In producing compound sentences, the respondents have to include a coordinator between each clause of the sentence. Contrary to expectation, most of
the respondents did not do this. Their compound sentences were sometimes without any coordinator. Below are the examples.
132 Siwa is the highest, Siwa is the leader. B 22 133 He has ten faces, he has ... twenty hands. D 49
134 The water fall down always then many people ... call this temple Banyunibo, the water falls down. F 65
135 So he comes to Shinta, ask for water to Shinta. G 64 136 So Siwa destroyer, his wife also the destroyer. I 52
It could be seen from the list above that those sentences did not have a coordinator. The coordinators needed were “and”, and “so”. The coordinator
“and” was needed by sentence 133, sentence 135, and sentence 137. Sentence 132 produced by respondent B had two possibilities of coordinators. It
could have the coordinator “and” or “so”. The application of each of the coordinator would lead to different meaning of the sentence. The respondent F
needed to add the coordinator “so” to sentence 134 above. From the transcription of each respondent the writer found that the most
needed coordinator was “and”. In fact, as the result, the writer found that the respondents did not attach any coordinators to those sentences listed above and
other sentences because they thought that the listeners already understood what they said since coordinator “and” would not cause a lot differences whether or not
it existed. Focussing on coordinator in compound sentences, the respondents
sometimes failed to choose which coordinator to attach when one was required. Respondent A produced several sentences which used inappropriate
coordinator. Following is an example.
137 Nobody can’t get in and Shinta stay by herself. A 43
That sentence had “and” as the coordinator. This coordinator was not proper because it brought a different meaning to the sentence and in fact the true
meaning respondent A wanted to say. That was why actually that sentence should have “so” as the coordinator to clarify the idea that was wanted to be conveyed.
Respondent D also produced several sentences with inappropriate coordinator. The examples can be seen below.
138 In the main chamber we have a statue Siwa as a Mahadewa or he is
also the highest god. D 17
The choice of the coordinator of the sentence above was inappropriate. He should change the coordinator “or” into “and” in order to show the relation
between the two clauses. The wrong choice of coordinators was also done by respondent F. The
sentence below is the example.
139 Then Bandung Bondowoso wanted to marry her and she didn’t love
him but so afraid to ... refuse his love. F 11
This sentence has “and” as the coordinator which made the sentence quite illogical. So, to make the sentence logical, respondent F had to produce this
sentence with “but” as its coordinator. So the sentence should be Bandung Bondowoso wanted to marry her but she didn’t love him and was so afraid to …
refuse his love.
