The Objective of the Study

a distinction between them: Error are systematic, consistent deviances characteristic of the learner’s linguistic system at a given stage of learning. Mistakes are deviations due to performance factors such as memory limitations e.g. spelling pronunciations, fatigue, emotional strain, etc. they are typically random and are readily corrected by the learner when his attention is drawn to them. 3 Mistakes are skin to slips of the tongue. That is, they are generally one-time- only events. The learner who makes a mistake is able to recognize it is a mistake and correct it if necessary. On the other hand, an error is systematic. That is, it is likely to occur repeatedly and is not recognized by the learner as an error. The learner in this case has incorporated erroneous form from the persectives of the target language into his or her system. 4 Hubbard et al. also make difference between error and mistake. “Errors caused by lack of knowledge about the target language English or by incorrect hypothesis about it; and unfortunate mistake caused by temporary lapse of memory, confusion, slip of the tongue and so on.” 5 In other words, Ellis stated that “Error is a lack of knowledge and mistake is the students’ posses’ knowledge of the correct form and it is just slipping up”. 6 Brown also gave the similar opinion about error and mistake. According to him, an error is a noticeable from the adult grammar of a native speaker, reflects the competence of the learner. And a mistake is “slip”, a failure to utilize a known system correctly. An error cannot be self corrected, while mistake can be self corrected if the deviation is pointed out to speaker. 7 Based on the opinions above the writer summed up that error caused by lack of knowledge, the student did not know what were they wrote and they could not 3 Jacek Fisiak, Contrastive Linguistics and the Language Teacher, Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981, p. 224 4 Susan M. Gass, Larry Selinker, Second Language Acquistion: An Introductory Course, New York: Routledge Taylor Francis Group, 2008, p.102 5 Peter Hubbard, et, al,. A Training Course for TEFL, New York: Oxford Univeristy Press, 1983, p. 134 6 Rod Ellis, The Study of Second Language Acquisition, Second Edition, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008, p.17 7 H. Douglas Brown, Principle of Language Learning and Teaching, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc, 1987, p. 217 recognize it unless other people or their teacher corrected them and it cannot be self corrected. While mistake happened because temporary laps of memory and also slip of the tongue, actually the students have known about what they write but they just “slip up” and they can correct and recognize their own mistakes.

C. ERROR ANALYSIS

1. The Understanding of Error Analysis

Learning a target language English is different from learning one’s mother tongue. There are some opinions about error analysis. Brown in his book stated that “Errors can be observed, analyzed, and classified to reveal something of the system operating within the learner, led to a surge o f study of learner’s errors, called error analysis”. 8 It seems this concept is the same as the one proposed by Crystal “Error Analysis is a technique for identifying, classifying, and systematically interpreting the unacceptable forms produced by someone learning a foreign language, using any of the principles and procedures provided by linguistic” 9 Ellis explained in her book that “Error analysis was one of the first methods used to investigate learner language”. 10 From the definitions above, the writer summarize that error analysis is an activity to identify, classify, and interpreted or describe the errors made by someone in speaking or in writing and it is carried out to obtain information on common difficulties faced by someone in speaking or in writing English sentences.

2. The Procedure of Error Analysis

There are some procedures in analyzing the learner errors. Corder suggests in Ellis the following steps in error analysis; collection of 8 Brown 1987, op.cit., p.259 9 D. Crystal, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987, p. 78 10 Ellis 2008, op.cit., p.68