ERROR ANALYSIS OF INDONESIAN LEARNERS OF ENGLISH: A CASE STUDY OF THE BRITISH INSTITUTE CONVERSATION CLASS STUDENTS.

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014

Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

ERROR ANALYSIS OF INDONESIAN LEARNERS OF ENGLISH:

A CASE STUDY OF THE BRITISH INSTITUTE CONVERSATION

CLASS STUDENTS

Disusun Untuk Memenuhi Syarat Mengikuti Wisuda dan Pengambilan Ijazah

Rheza Nur Rahman 0707820

PROGRAM STUDI BAHASA DAN SASTRA INGGRIS

JURUSAN PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INGGRIS

FAKULTAS PENDIDIKAN BAHASA DAN SENI

UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA

2014

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014

Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

Error Analysis of Indonesian learners of

English: A Case Study of The British

Institute Conversation Class Students

Oleh

Rheza Nur Rahman

Sebuah Antologi Jurnal yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni

© Rheza Nur Rahman 2014 Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Februari 2014

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

Antologi Jurnal ini tidak boleh diperbanyak seluruhya atau sebagian, dengan dicetak ulang, difoto kopi, atau cara lainnya tanpa ijin dari penulis.

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014 Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

Error Analysis of Indonesian learners of English:

A Case Study of The British Institute

Conversation Class Students

Rheza Nur Rahman

0707820

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Abstract

The main purpose of this paper was to identify common phonetic, morphological, and syntactic errors committed by Indonesian learner of English during the class conversation. The sample was eleven students of a level five English conversation class. These errors identified among eleven level five conversation class students of The British Institute were substitution of consonant /t/ for /Ө/ and /p/ for /f/; failure to use plural and third person singular (-s/es), the great difficulty in using derivational morpheme (-ment), progressive (-ing); and failed to use the linking verb in progressive construction, a difficulty in using definite and indefinite articles, and lack of subject-verb agreement.

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014 Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

Error Analysis of Indonesian learners of English:

A Case Study of The British Institute

Conversation Class Students

Rheza Nur Rahman

0707820

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Abstract

Tujuan utama dari studi ini adalah untuk mengidentifikasi kesalahan phonetic, morphology dan syntactic yang umum dilakukan oleh pelajar Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia selama kelas percakapan. Sampel yang diambil dalam studi ini adalah sebelas orang anggota kelas percakapan Bahasa Inggris level lima. Kesalahan-kesalahan yang teridentifikasi dari sebelas orang anggota kelas percakapan Bahasa Inggris level lima di The British Institute adalah penggantian konsonan /t/ untuk /Ө/ dan /p/ untuk /f/; kegagalan penggunaan plural dan third person singular s/es), kesulitan besar dalam penggunaan derivational morpheme (-ment), progressive (-ing); dan kegagalan dalam penggunaan linking verb pada pembentukan kalimat progressive, kesulitan dalam penggunaan definite dan indefinite articles, serta kurangnya pemahaman dari subject-verb agreement. Keywords: Error analysis, Second Language Acquisition

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014 Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

Daftar Isi

1. Abstract 1

2. Introduction 1

a. Research questions 2

3. Methodology 2

a. Participant 3

b. Procedure 3

c. Data Analysis 3

4. Findings and Discussions 3

a. Phonetic Errors 3

b. Morphological Errors 4

c. Syntactic Errors 5

1 Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014

Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

1. Introduction

There are numbers of area that Second Language Acquisition (SLA) researchers have been investigating. One of the areas of the SLA which is widely used by the researchers is Error Analysis. Error analysis is an applied linguistics approach used to identify the difficulties faced by the learners of the second language. As harashima (2006) said that it has widely been used “to further understand the nature of learner language.” One of the purposes of error analysis is to investigate how learners’ native language influences their second language acquisition or what the difficulties in acquiring a second language.

Errors or mistakes committed by the learners of second language in classroom are unavoidable. It is believed that learning is a process in which learners profit from mistakes by obtaining feedback to make a new attempt toward success. The learners’ errors also give researchers evidence about how language is learned or acquired and what factor influence it. According to Al-Badawi (2012) “learners’ errors reflect a gap in their competence, order of acquisition and accuracy in order of learning.” So by identifying this errors, the difficulties which are faced by the learners can be revealed.

Studies about error analysis of the second language learners have been conducted by Lee (2010), Al-Badawi (2012), and Harashima (2006). Lee study (2010) about error analysis of Chinese learners of the Korean language, which focused on source analysis of content-based errors, has found out the ratios of different classes of error classes at various levels: 1) spelling errors to content-based errors for beginners 78%:23%, for intermediate 20%:80%, for advanced 36%:64%; and 2) Native tongue-interference errors to developmental errors to unique for beginners 11%:87%:2%, for Intermediate 21%:69%:10%, for advanced 29%:71%:1%. The study conducted on Arabian learners of English in Saudi Arabia by Al-Badawi (2012) explains the most common errors commited by the Arab learners of English were substitution of the consonants /f/ for /v/ and /p/ for /b/ and the vowels /ə/ for /Ɔ/, /ə/ for /Ʊ/ and /ε/ for /ɪ/; failure to use the plural and third-person singular (- s/es), the comparative (-er), and the progressive (-ing); and lack of subject–verb agreement, erroneous use of prepositions, and erroneous addition and deletion of certain auxiliaries. Harashima’s study (2006) claims that interference from the L1 is considered to indicate only a minor effect in modern applied linguistics theories.

2 Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014

Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

a. Research Questions

This study is geared toward answering the following research questions to identify the errors made by the learners:

1) What types of phonetic errors are committed by learners? 2) What types of morphological errors are committed by learners? 3) What types of syntactic errors are committed by learners?

4

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014

Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

3. Findings and Discussions a. Phonetic Errors

The findings of the phonetic errors can be seen on table 1 in the appendix, it shows the errors made by the participants are mostly about misarticulation. Regarding the misarticulation of consonant, half of the participants substituted the voiceless alveolar /t/ for the voiceless interdental /Ө/. This misarticulation was frequently found when they want to pronounce the word ‘think’. When the second language speakers commit this error the place of articulation is changed from interdental to alveolar. Although they are maintaining the state of glottis, they neglect the manner of articulation (changed from fricative to stop). So the sound that is produced is also different. Another finding of misarticulation of consonant is that the participants substituted the voiceless bilabial /p/ for the voiceless labiodental /f/ in first position. They are failed to pronounce the word ‘fainted’ correctly, they pronounce the sound /p/ instead of /f/ so the word that was pronounced become ‘painted’. In this second finding, the participant maintains the state of glottis which is voiceless but changed the place of articulation from labiodental to bilabial. At the same time, the manner of articulation is also changed from fricative to stop.

From these two findings can be seen that the participants tend to use the state of glottis of voiceless and manner of articulation of stop. It seems to be influenced by Bahasa Indonesia consonants that there is no consonant which have the sound /Ө/. Thus, when the participants pronounce the word which has phoneme /Ө/, they tend to substitute it with the sound of /t/. It shows that L1 knowledge remains present in the mind of L2 learners, it influence the L2 acquisition.

b. Morphological Errors

Half of the participants have failed to use the plural (-s/es) in certain phrases which can be seen on table 2 in the appendix. This error arises due to the influence of the L1 which have no marker for the plural in word level. Most of the participants failed to use the inflectional suffix to show the third person singular present (-s/es) like in number 1, 2 and 3. There is also found like in number 4 that some of the participants were confused in using the derivational morpheme (-ment) and inflectional suffix (-ing).

5

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014

Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

1. In my card the old man look the schedule and the man just sit on the bus stop. 2. Because in my card the man in the hat try to stealing in her bag.

3. And he just sit in the chair and thinking what just happen to him 4. The elephant feels so embarrassment… embarrassing… embarrass…

These types of errors arise because of the influence of the native language knowledge which is applied to the target language. In the L1 there is no marker at word level to distinguish whether a word is plural or singular. And the same thing happens for a verb where there is no difference whether it is first person or third person. It is related to the omission and addition related to the lack of knowledge of L2, in other word a developmental error. Since the learners rely to their knowledge of L1.

c. Syntactic Errors

The syntactic errors committed by the participant arise due to lack of knowledge in second language. The participant mostly failed to use the linking verb (is/are) when they were use progressive construction (-ing) such as in the following:

- Henry planning to spend a long weekend at his friend’s cabin.

- … Because in my card the man in the hat try to stealing in her bag and then… - _{The organization is hire everyone to vacation for free.}

- … _{the man trying to hit the mirror of the} jewelery with that rock but unfortunately it’s not a mirror but it’s like a steel.

The error made by the participants indicates that their knowledge of English is not good enough to produce the progressive construction sentence. Most of the participant face a great difficulty in using definite (the) and indefinite (a/an) articles. They often substituted the indefinite article for the definite article. These errors happen because of there is no marker for definite or indefinite in the L1, so they often face the difficulty in using them in L2. The subject verb agreement was violated where some of the participants failed to use the third person singular (-s/es) the evidence can be seen on table 3 in the appendix. This error occurs due to the insufficient knowledge of English and the influence of the native language which does not have any marker (like -s/es in English) for third person singular.

6

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014

Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students

Rheza Nur Rahman, 2014 Error Analysis Of Indonesian Learners Of English: A Case Study Of The British Institute Conversation Class Students Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

Bibliography

Al-Badawi, K. (2012). An analysis of phonetic, morphological and syntactic errors in english: a case study of saudi ba students at king khalid university [Electronic version].

International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 2, No. 6, 536-538. Retrieved November 19th, 2013, from http://www.ijssh.org/papers/165-A10037.pdf.

Cipollone, N.; Keiser, S. H. & Vasishth, S. (eds.) (1998). Language Files: materials for an introduction to language & linguistics 7th Edition. Ohio: Ohio State University.

Harashima, H.D. (2006). An error analysis of the speech of an experienced Japanese learner of English. 共愛学園前橋国際大学論集. No. 6, Pp 37-58. Retrieved December 4

th

, 2013, from http://www.kyoai.ac.jp/college/ronshuu/no-06/harashima.pdf.

Lee, J. H. (2010). Error analysis of chinese learners of the korean language: focus on source analysis of content-based errors. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, Vol. 7, Suppl. 1, pp. 110-124. Retrieved December 4th, 2013, from

e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v7sp12010/lee.pdf‎.

Lyons, J. (1981). Language and Linguistics: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

1. Introduction

There are numbers of area that Second Language Acquisition (SLA) researchers have been investigating. One of the areas of the SLA which is widely used by the researchers is Error Analysis. Error analysis is an applied linguistics approach used to identify the difficulties faced by the learners of the second language. As harashima (2006) said that it has widely been used “to further understand the nature of learner language.” One of the purposes of error analysis is to investigate how learners’ native language influences their second language acquisition or what the difficulties in acquiring a second language.

Errors or mistakes committed by the learners of second language in classroom are unavoidable. It is believed that learning is a process in which learners profit from mistakes by obtaining feedback to make a new attempt toward success. The learners’ errors also give researchers evidence about how language is learned or acquired and what factor influence it. According to Al-Badawi (2012) “learners’ errors reflect a gap in their competence, order of acquisition and accuracy in order of learning.” So by identifying this errors, the difficulties which are faced by the learners can be revealed.

Studies about error analysis of the second language learners have been conducted by Lee (2010), Al-Badawi (2012), and Harashima (2006). Lee study (2010) about error analysis of Chinese learners of the Korean language, which focused on source analysis of content-based errors, has found out the ratios of different classes of error classes at various levels: 1) spelling errors to content-based errors for beginners 78%:23%, for intermediate 20%:80%, for advanced 36%:64%; and 2) Native tongue-interference errors to developmental errors to unique for beginners 11%:87%:2%, for Intermediate 21%:69%:10%, for advanced 29%:71%:1%. The study conducted on Arabian learners of English in Saudi Arabia by Al-Badawi (2012) explains the most common errors commited by the Arab learners of English were substitution of the consonants /f/ for /v/ and /p/ for /b/ and the vowels /ə/ for /Ɔ/, /ə/ for /Ʊ/ and /ε/ for /ɪ/; failure to use the plural and third-person singular (- s/es), the comparative (-er), and the progressive (-ing); and lack of subject–verb agreement, erroneous use of prepositions, and erroneous addition and deletion of certain auxiliaries. Harashima’s study (2006) claims that interference from the L1 is considered to indicate only a minor effect in modern applied linguistics theories.

a. Research Questions

This study is geared toward answering the following research questions to identify the errors made by the learners:

1) What types of phonetic errors are committed by learners? 2) What types of morphological errors are committed by learners? 3) What types of syntactic errors are committed by learners?

3. Findings and Discussions a. Phonetic Errors

The findings of the phonetic errors can be seen on table 1 in the appendix, it shows the errors made by the participants are mostly about misarticulation. Regarding the misarticulation of consonant, half of the participants substituted the voiceless alveolar /t/ for the voiceless interdental /Ө/. This misarticulation was frequently found when they want to pronounce the word ‘think’. When the second language speakers commit this error the place of articulation is changed from interdental to alveolar. Although they are maintaining the state of glottis, they neglect the manner of articulation (changed from fricative to stop). So the sound that is produced is also different. Another finding of misarticulation of consonant is that the participants substituted the voiceless bilabial /p/ for the voiceless labiodental /f/ in first position. They are failed to pronounce the word ‘fainted’ correctly, they pronounce the sound /p/ instead of /f/ so the word that was pronounced become ‘painted’. In this second finding, the participant maintains the state of glottis which is voiceless but changed the place of articulation from labiodental to bilabial. At the same time, the manner of articulation is also changed from fricative to stop.

From these two findings can be seen that the participants tend to use the state of glottis of voiceless and manner of articulation of stop. It seems to be influenced by Bahasa Indonesia consonants that there is no consonant which have the sound /Ө/. Thus, when the participants pronounce the word which has phoneme /Ө/, they tend to substitute it with the sound of /t/. It shows that L1 knowledge remains present in the mind of L2 learners, it influence the L2 acquisition.

b. Morphological Errors

Half of the participants have failed to use the plural (-s/es) in certain phrases which can be seen on table 2 in the appendix. This error arises due to the influence of the L1 which have no marker for the plural in word level. Most of the participants failed to use the inflectional suffix to show the third person singular present (-s/es) like in number 1, 2 and 3. There is also found like in number 4 that some of the participants were confused in using the derivational morpheme (-ment) and inflectional suffix (-ing).

1. In my card the old man look the schedule and the man just sit on the bus stop. 2. Because in my card the man in the hat try to stealing in her bag.

3. And he just sit in the chair and thinking what just happen to him

4. The elephant feels so embarrassment… embarrassing… embarrass…

These types of errors arise because of the influence of the native language knowledge which is applied to the target language. In the L1 there is no marker at word level to distinguish whether a word is plural or singular. And the same thing happens for a verb where there is no difference whether it is first person or third person. It is related to the omission and addition related to the lack of knowledge of L2, in other word a developmental error. Since the learners rely to their knowledge of L1.

c. Syntactic Errors

The syntactic errors committed by the participant arise due to lack of knowledge in second language. The participant mostly failed to use the linking verb (is/are) when they were use progressive construction (-ing) such as in the following:

- Henry planning to spend a long weekend at his friend’s cabin.

- … Because in my card the man in the hat try to stealing in her bag and then… - _{The organization is hire everyone to vacation for free.}

- … _{the man trying to hit the mirror of the} jewelery with that rock but unfortunately it’s not a mirror but it’s like a steel.

The error made by the participants indicates that their knowledge of English is not good enough to produce the progressive construction sentence. Most of the participant face a great difficulty in using definite (the) and indefinite (a/an) articles. They often substituted the indefinite article for the definite article. These errors happen because of there is no marker for definite or indefinite in the L1, so they often face the difficulty in using them in L2. The subject verb agreement was violated where some of the participants failed to use the third person singular (-s/es) the evidence can be seen on table 3 in the appendix. This error occurs due to the insufficient knowledge of English and the influence of the native language which does not have any marker (like -s/es in English) for third person singular.

Bibliography

Al-Badawi, K. (2012). An analysis of phonetic, morphological and syntactic errors in english: a case study of saudi ba students at king khalid university [Electronic version].

International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 2, No. 6, 536-538. Retrieved

November 19th, 2013, from http://www.ijssh.org/papers/165-A10037.pdf.

Cipollone, N.; Keiser, S. H. & Vasishth, S. (eds.) (1998). Language Files: materials for an

introduction to language & linguistics 7th Edition. Ohio: Ohio State University.

Harashima, H.D. (2006). An error analysis of the speech of an experienced Japanese learner of English. 共愛学園前橋国際大学論集. No. 6, Pp 37-58. Retrieved December 4

th

, 2013, from http://www.kyoai.ac.jp/college/ronshuu/no-06/harashima.pdf.

Lee, J. H. (2010). Error analysis of chinese learners of the korean language: focus on source analysis of content-based errors. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, Vol.

7, Suppl. 1, pp. 110-124. Retrieved December 4th, 2013, from

e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v7sp12010/lee.pdf‎.

Lyons, J. (1981). Language and Linguistics: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.