GRADUATE STUDENTS SYNTACTICAL ERRORS IN WRITING THESIS.
GRADUATE STUDENTS’ SYNTACTICAL ERRORS IN WRITING
THESIS
A THESIS
Submitted to Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
By:
HANNA MEILINDA RODEARNI SINAGA
Reg. Number: 209220017
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2013
DECLARATION
The writer states that this thesis is truly her own work. It does not incorporate any
materials previously written or published by another person except those indicated in
quotations and references. Due to this fact, she is only person responsible if there is any
objection or claims from others.
Medan, August 2013
Hanna Meilinda R Sinaga
Reg. No. 209220017
ABSTRACT
Sinaga, Hanna Meilinda R. 2013. Graduate Students’ Syntactical Errors in
Writing Thesis. A Thesis. English and Literature Department. Faculty of
Languages and Arts. State University of Medan.
This study deals with the graduate students’ syntactical errors in writing thesis.
This study uses a qualitative design in which the data are taken from the sentences
of thesis. The data are collected and described using surface strategy taxonomy
proposed by Dulay, Burt, and Krashen. The errors found are classified into
syntactical errors based on Politzer and Romirez’ model as a guideline. The
researcher applies randomly technique to get a representative sample; there are 6
theses as the sample. The analysis found that there are four types of syntactical
errors which used; they are Omision 156, Addition 46, Misformation 114 and
Misordering 19. So, the most dominant type of syntactical errors made in graduate
students’ thesis is omission. It is hoped that the result of this study is useful to
everyone who wants to study about syntactical errors.
Keywords : Syntactical Errors, Thesis
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The great thankfulness, praises and glories to God Almighty for loving and
blessing the writer during the completion of this thesis. This thesis is aimed to
fulfilling one of the requirements for degree of Sarjana Sastra at the English
Department of Faculty Language and Arts, State University of Medan.
During this process of completing this thesis, the writer has worked with a
great number of people, through their guidance, suggestion, comment for which
the writer would like to extend her sincere and special thanks to:
Prof. Dr. Ibnu Hajar Damanik, M.Si., as the Rector of State University
of Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., as the Dean of Faculty of Language and
Arts, Vice Dean I, II, and III, and all the administrative staff.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., as the Head of English Department,
Rika, S. Pd., M.Hum., as Secretary of English Department, Dra.
Meisuri, M.A., as the Head of English Literature Department and Dra.
Masitowarni, M.Ed., as the Head of English Education Department.
Deepest appreciation is dedicated to the writer’s thesis advisor, Prof. Dr.
Lince Sihombing, M.Pd., who also acts as a mother in giving the writer
guidance, comment, support and advice. So that the writer has got greatly
improvement in her thesis writing and Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning,
M.Pd., as the academic advisor thanks for the advice and comment and all
the lectures throughout her academic years at the State University of
Medan who have shared their knowledge to her.
ii
A deepest love, appreciation and gratitude is addressed to the writer’s
beloved parents, L. Sinaga as her father, and D. Sipayung as her mother
who always give love, pray, spirit moreover financial support for the
writer. The same thankfullness is also adressed to her beloved brothers
Andy Sinaga and Albert Sinaga for the endless love and prays.
Thanks is also presented to her best friend Chandro Libra G for the
kindness, pray, support, care, jokes and all the times he shares with the
writer.
Thanks is also to her beloved cell group Amazing Grace (AgRa) K’ Mory,
Anita, Harna, Lisa, Sartika, Faris, Rgg
Thanks to all sisters at boarding house Beauty Puri K’ Epri, K’ Mega, K’
Happy, Tari, Astria, and Roma for their pray and support for the writer.
Thanks is also given to all her classmate in Applied Linguistics 2009 class
A/B, and those whose name can not be mentioned one by one. May God
bless you all. Thank you.
Medan, August 2013
The Writer
Hanna Meilinda Rodearni S
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ..................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................. vi
LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION ..............................................................1
A. The Background of Study ..............................................1
B. The Problem of Study .....................................................4
C. The Objective of Study ...................................................5
D. The Scope of Study ........................................................5
E. The Significance of Study ..............................................5
CHAPTER 11
REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................7
A. Theoretical Framework ..................................................7
B. Error ................................................................................7
C. Mistake ...........................................................................8
D. Error Analysis ................................................................9
E. Types of Errors .............................................................13
1. Linguistic Category Taxonomy .................................13
a. Phrase .....................................................................13
b. Clause .....................................................................14
c. Sentence..................................................................15
2. Surface Strategy Taxonomy ......................................17
a. Omission.................................................................18
b. Addition .................................................................19
c. Misformation ..........................................................19
d. Misordering ............................................................20
F. Syntactical Errors ..........................................................20
G. Writing .........................................................................23
H. Thesis ...........................................................................24
I. Relevant Study ...............................................................25
J. Conceptual Framework ..................................................26
`
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD ...................................................25
A. Research Design ...........................................................25
B. The Sources of Data .....................................................25
C. The Sample of Data ......................................................26
D. The Techniques of Collecting Data ..............................26
E. The Techniques of Analyzing Data ..............................27
CHAPTER IV
DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS .....................................28
A. Data ..............................................................................28
B. The Data Analysis ........................................................29
C. Findings ........................................................................37
1. Identification of Errors .............................................37
iv
2. Description of Errors ................................................38
3. Classification of Errors ............................................38
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ...........................43
A. Conclusions ..................................................................43
B. Suggestions ...................................................................44
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
............................................................................................45
............................................................................................47
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix I. The Analysis of Syntactical Errors.....................................................................47
Appendix II. The Thesis of Students ……….….....................................................................66
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A.
The Background of Study
Making errors is the most natural thing in the world and it is evidently
attached to the human being. It is usually be a necessary part of learning moreover
in English learning process. Human learning is fundamentally a process that
involves the making of mistakes, misjudgments, miscalculations, and erroneous. It
is not only errors but also mistakes. In order to analyze learner‟s language in an
appropriate perspective, it‟s crucial to make a distinction between mistakes and
errors, which technically are two very different phenomena.
According to James, “A mistake refers to a performance error that is either a
random guess or a slip in that”. It is a failure to utilize a known system correctly.
An error, a noticeable deviation from the adult grammar of a native speaker,
reflects the competence of the learners.
English learners who ask, “John cans sing”. It‟s all in likelihood reflecting a
competence level, in which all verbs required s for the third person in the present
tense, but it is an overtly idiosyncratic sentence and it can be called an error that
reveals a portion of the learning competence in the target language.
Learning a foreign language like English, of course, takes times. English as
an International language is not new for Indonesian students because it is a
compulsory subject which is taught since kindergarten until Students College.
1
2
However, there are many students who still can‟t use English well. In practice,
students are still making errors when they are using English especially in written
forms. Focuses on learning packages aimed at students who are learning English
as foreign language, these errors made can be caused by their carelessness about
using a good structural or they are in a rush. This learning can be as evaluation of
materials for learners, awareness of the needs of teachers in terms of teaching
trainning (Taylor, 2002: 306).
Writing is the production of the written word in the form of text and it must
be read and comprehended in order to communicate. Writing is as the reflection of
the language users‟ cultural background. When students are writing, they express
what are on their minds and feel. Writing is not an easy thing to do. It needs some
guidances such consulting with dictionaries in choosing the appropriate words to
be written; books of grammar in avoiding the erroneous of structural; or
consulting with the people who are expert in grammar.
Error, it is often found in writing thesis as the final assignment for students‟
college. Students‟ mastery in Indonesia and English is not same proportion. It can
be that Indonesian students who are learning English are affected by Indonesia
ways of thinking. These errors can be recognized by syntactic means. These are
perhaps here that the native-language modeling which is described by Catt (1988)
might be effective. The range of possibilities goes from several dozen rules to an
extensive system of English grammar modeling.
In writing, students are expected to concern about grammatical structure
rather than in speaking where they are expected to be able to communicate with
3
another effectively and fluently without worrying grammatical relations such as
about agreement or tense shifting.
Based observation that is often seen by the writer in Faculty of Language at
State University of Medan, from the whole theses it is found that there are some
syntactical errors in writing thesis. The thesis, of course, the thesis which is
written in English. They belong to graduate students‟ theses – Applied Linguistics
and English Department. The researcher chooses graduate students‟ thesis to be
analyzed because it is the final work which is as product of their writing skill as
well as their skill in constructing sentence well. The researcher believes that the
students who learn syntax study have to write sentence well, but the fact shows
that their thesis have errors in the sentence construction. Syntactical error is a
confusion in part of speech. Some of the errors are difficult to categorize
unambiguously, however an error in word meaning may be caused by ignorance
of just one word, but it effects are sometimes global: that is the entire sentence
may be affected in unpredictable ways (Ruth Sanders, 1987).
1. Human beings known as a novelist, dramatist or short story writers have
created literary works.
2. To obtain the validity of the test of the following correlation product
moment by person is used.
3. Subject and auxiliary verb are regularly ordered to indicate whether a
sentences is in the interrogative form.
The above examples are not only a matter of formula in each sentences but
also the omission, addition, misformation, misorder and transformation, so the
4
errors of the examples given is sentence (1) The error is in omission that is
omission in verb phrase, which is in „be‟ and transformation in passive voice
pattern, then the correct sentence must be “Human beings are known as a novelist,
dramatist or short story writers have created literary works”. Syntactic error in (2)
is misorder, and then the correct sentence must be “To obtain the validity of the
test of the following correlation product moment is used by person”. Sentence (3)
is addition of„s‟ in singular nouns. There is an addition of the unimportant object
when it is in numeralization. The correct sentence must be “Subject and auxiliary
verb are regularly ordered to indicate whether a sentence is in the interrogative
form”.
From this observation, the writer is interested to take this problem so that
from the errors analyzed, it can improve the students‟ knowledge of mastering
grammar in writing. The writer assumes that this study becomes a useful research
and makes students understand about grammar.
B.
The Problems of Study
Based on explanations above, the problems of the study are formulated as
following:
1. What are the types of the graduate students‟ syntactical errors in writing
thesis?
2. What are the dominant types of the graduate students‟ syntactical errors in
writing thesis?
5
C.
The Objectives of Study
Related to the problems, the objectives of this study are to find out:
1. The types of the graduate students‟ syntactical errors in writing
thesis
2. The dominant types of the graduate students‟ syntactical errors in
writing thesis.
D. The Scope of Study
The study is limited on the area of error which is focused on syntax based on
the classification of surface strategy taxonomy proposed by Dulay, Burt, and
Krashen based on Politzer and Romirez theory as guideline. The analysis of
syntactical errors are limited in the area of chapter 1, chapter 3, chapter 4 and
chapter 5.
E.
The Significance of Study
The findings of this study are expected to be useful. The benefits of this
study are:
Theoretically, the result of the research can be a reference for those who want to
conduct a research in Error Analysis especially in analyzing writing. Practically,
the writer hopes that this study will be useful for:
1. The students, to enrich their knowledge and understanding in identifying
the types of errors and to avoid making the errors over and over.
2. The other researchers, to enrich their knowledge about errors. It will give
clear understanding about them so they can study and analyze deeply.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
In this chapter, the writer presents the conclusions and suggestions dealing
with the data analysis of the research.
A.
Conclusions
Based on the data analysis that has been presented in the previous chapter,
the writer concludes this study based on the problem of the study. They can be
seen as follows:
1. All types of syntactical errors are available on that thesis analysis. Based
on the surface strategy taxonomy analysis, the result of the analysis shows
that the total number of errors in syntax is 387. They are 156 sentences
errors of omission, 46 sentences errors of addition, 114 sentences errors of
misformation, 19 sentences errors of misorder and 52 sentences errors of
transformation.
2. The most dominant type of syntactical error in the six theses is omission
type. Within the errors of omission, omission of third singular inflection to
show the agreement of subject. The errors found show the students often
make errors in forming verb (agreement of subject and verb) in sentences.
3. the errors found are small but significant
43
44
B.
Suggestions
Based on the significances of the study, this study aims to give benefit
contribution as the following:
1. Students, this study will give new information that will be useful for their
learning process of syntax field. They also know what aspect in grammar
which is difficult for them, so they can improve their studying. .
2. Researchers who are interested in the same research to study
and analyze the syntax field deeply. The writer hopes that the next
researchers analyze the other aspects, which are not covered in this study
yet, it could be in writing text with each genre, writing application letter, or
other writings.
3. Proof readers, this study is useful so that they can help the other
researchers to correct the writing’s structures
THESIS
A THESIS
Submitted to Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
By:
HANNA MEILINDA RODEARNI SINAGA
Reg. Number: 209220017
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2013
DECLARATION
The writer states that this thesis is truly her own work. It does not incorporate any
materials previously written or published by another person except those indicated in
quotations and references. Due to this fact, she is only person responsible if there is any
objection or claims from others.
Medan, August 2013
Hanna Meilinda R Sinaga
Reg. No. 209220017
ABSTRACT
Sinaga, Hanna Meilinda R. 2013. Graduate Students’ Syntactical Errors in
Writing Thesis. A Thesis. English and Literature Department. Faculty of
Languages and Arts. State University of Medan.
This study deals with the graduate students’ syntactical errors in writing thesis.
This study uses a qualitative design in which the data are taken from the sentences
of thesis. The data are collected and described using surface strategy taxonomy
proposed by Dulay, Burt, and Krashen. The errors found are classified into
syntactical errors based on Politzer and Romirez’ model as a guideline. The
researcher applies randomly technique to get a representative sample; there are 6
theses as the sample. The analysis found that there are four types of syntactical
errors which used; they are Omision 156, Addition 46, Misformation 114 and
Misordering 19. So, the most dominant type of syntactical errors made in graduate
students’ thesis is omission. It is hoped that the result of this study is useful to
everyone who wants to study about syntactical errors.
Keywords : Syntactical Errors, Thesis
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The great thankfulness, praises and glories to God Almighty for loving and
blessing the writer during the completion of this thesis. This thesis is aimed to
fulfilling one of the requirements for degree of Sarjana Sastra at the English
Department of Faculty Language and Arts, State University of Medan.
During this process of completing this thesis, the writer has worked with a
great number of people, through their guidance, suggestion, comment for which
the writer would like to extend her sincere and special thanks to:
Prof. Dr. Ibnu Hajar Damanik, M.Si., as the Rector of State University
of Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., as the Dean of Faculty of Language and
Arts, Vice Dean I, II, and III, and all the administrative staff.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., as the Head of English Department,
Rika, S. Pd., M.Hum., as Secretary of English Department, Dra.
Meisuri, M.A., as the Head of English Literature Department and Dra.
Masitowarni, M.Ed., as the Head of English Education Department.
Deepest appreciation is dedicated to the writer’s thesis advisor, Prof. Dr.
Lince Sihombing, M.Pd., who also acts as a mother in giving the writer
guidance, comment, support and advice. So that the writer has got greatly
improvement in her thesis writing and Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning,
M.Pd., as the academic advisor thanks for the advice and comment and all
the lectures throughout her academic years at the State University of
Medan who have shared their knowledge to her.
ii
A deepest love, appreciation and gratitude is addressed to the writer’s
beloved parents, L. Sinaga as her father, and D. Sipayung as her mother
who always give love, pray, spirit moreover financial support for the
writer. The same thankfullness is also adressed to her beloved brothers
Andy Sinaga and Albert Sinaga for the endless love and prays.
Thanks is also presented to her best friend Chandro Libra G for the
kindness, pray, support, care, jokes and all the times he shares with the
writer.
Thanks is also to her beloved cell group Amazing Grace (AgRa) K’ Mory,
Anita, Harna, Lisa, Sartika, Faris, Rgg
Thanks to all sisters at boarding house Beauty Puri K’ Epri, K’ Mega, K’
Happy, Tari, Astria, and Roma for their pray and support for the writer.
Thanks is also given to all her classmate in Applied Linguistics 2009 class
A/B, and those whose name can not be mentioned one by one. May God
bless you all. Thank you.
Medan, August 2013
The Writer
Hanna Meilinda Rodearni S
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ..................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................. vi
LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION ..............................................................1
A. The Background of Study ..............................................1
B. The Problem of Study .....................................................4
C. The Objective of Study ...................................................5
D. The Scope of Study ........................................................5
E. The Significance of Study ..............................................5
CHAPTER 11
REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................7
A. Theoretical Framework ..................................................7
B. Error ................................................................................7
C. Mistake ...........................................................................8
D. Error Analysis ................................................................9
E. Types of Errors .............................................................13
1. Linguistic Category Taxonomy .................................13
a. Phrase .....................................................................13
b. Clause .....................................................................14
c. Sentence..................................................................15
2. Surface Strategy Taxonomy ......................................17
a. Omission.................................................................18
b. Addition .................................................................19
c. Misformation ..........................................................19
d. Misordering ............................................................20
F. Syntactical Errors ..........................................................20
G. Writing .........................................................................23
H. Thesis ...........................................................................24
I. Relevant Study ...............................................................25
J. Conceptual Framework ..................................................26
`
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD ...................................................25
A. Research Design ...........................................................25
B. The Sources of Data .....................................................25
C. The Sample of Data ......................................................26
D. The Techniques of Collecting Data ..............................26
E. The Techniques of Analyzing Data ..............................27
CHAPTER IV
DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS .....................................28
A. Data ..............................................................................28
B. The Data Analysis ........................................................29
C. Findings ........................................................................37
1. Identification of Errors .............................................37
iv
2. Description of Errors ................................................38
3. Classification of Errors ............................................38
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ...........................43
A. Conclusions ..................................................................43
B. Suggestions ...................................................................44
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
............................................................................................45
............................................................................................47
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix I. The Analysis of Syntactical Errors.....................................................................47
Appendix II. The Thesis of Students ……….….....................................................................66
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A.
The Background of Study
Making errors is the most natural thing in the world and it is evidently
attached to the human being. It is usually be a necessary part of learning moreover
in English learning process. Human learning is fundamentally a process that
involves the making of mistakes, misjudgments, miscalculations, and erroneous. It
is not only errors but also mistakes. In order to analyze learner‟s language in an
appropriate perspective, it‟s crucial to make a distinction between mistakes and
errors, which technically are two very different phenomena.
According to James, “A mistake refers to a performance error that is either a
random guess or a slip in that”. It is a failure to utilize a known system correctly.
An error, a noticeable deviation from the adult grammar of a native speaker,
reflects the competence of the learners.
English learners who ask, “John cans sing”. It‟s all in likelihood reflecting a
competence level, in which all verbs required s for the third person in the present
tense, but it is an overtly idiosyncratic sentence and it can be called an error that
reveals a portion of the learning competence in the target language.
Learning a foreign language like English, of course, takes times. English as
an International language is not new for Indonesian students because it is a
compulsory subject which is taught since kindergarten until Students College.
1
2
However, there are many students who still can‟t use English well. In practice,
students are still making errors when they are using English especially in written
forms. Focuses on learning packages aimed at students who are learning English
as foreign language, these errors made can be caused by their carelessness about
using a good structural or they are in a rush. This learning can be as evaluation of
materials for learners, awareness of the needs of teachers in terms of teaching
trainning (Taylor, 2002: 306).
Writing is the production of the written word in the form of text and it must
be read and comprehended in order to communicate. Writing is as the reflection of
the language users‟ cultural background. When students are writing, they express
what are on their minds and feel. Writing is not an easy thing to do. It needs some
guidances such consulting with dictionaries in choosing the appropriate words to
be written; books of grammar in avoiding the erroneous of structural; or
consulting with the people who are expert in grammar.
Error, it is often found in writing thesis as the final assignment for students‟
college. Students‟ mastery in Indonesia and English is not same proportion. It can
be that Indonesian students who are learning English are affected by Indonesia
ways of thinking. These errors can be recognized by syntactic means. These are
perhaps here that the native-language modeling which is described by Catt (1988)
might be effective. The range of possibilities goes from several dozen rules to an
extensive system of English grammar modeling.
In writing, students are expected to concern about grammatical structure
rather than in speaking where they are expected to be able to communicate with
3
another effectively and fluently without worrying grammatical relations such as
about agreement or tense shifting.
Based observation that is often seen by the writer in Faculty of Language at
State University of Medan, from the whole theses it is found that there are some
syntactical errors in writing thesis. The thesis, of course, the thesis which is
written in English. They belong to graduate students‟ theses – Applied Linguistics
and English Department. The researcher chooses graduate students‟ thesis to be
analyzed because it is the final work which is as product of their writing skill as
well as their skill in constructing sentence well. The researcher believes that the
students who learn syntax study have to write sentence well, but the fact shows
that their thesis have errors in the sentence construction. Syntactical error is a
confusion in part of speech. Some of the errors are difficult to categorize
unambiguously, however an error in word meaning may be caused by ignorance
of just one word, but it effects are sometimes global: that is the entire sentence
may be affected in unpredictable ways (Ruth Sanders, 1987).
1. Human beings known as a novelist, dramatist or short story writers have
created literary works.
2. To obtain the validity of the test of the following correlation product
moment by person is used.
3. Subject and auxiliary verb are regularly ordered to indicate whether a
sentences is in the interrogative form.
The above examples are not only a matter of formula in each sentences but
also the omission, addition, misformation, misorder and transformation, so the
4
errors of the examples given is sentence (1) The error is in omission that is
omission in verb phrase, which is in „be‟ and transformation in passive voice
pattern, then the correct sentence must be “Human beings are known as a novelist,
dramatist or short story writers have created literary works”. Syntactic error in (2)
is misorder, and then the correct sentence must be “To obtain the validity of the
test of the following correlation product moment is used by person”. Sentence (3)
is addition of„s‟ in singular nouns. There is an addition of the unimportant object
when it is in numeralization. The correct sentence must be “Subject and auxiliary
verb are regularly ordered to indicate whether a sentence is in the interrogative
form”.
From this observation, the writer is interested to take this problem so that
from the errors analyzed, it can improve the students‟ knowledge of mastering
grammar in writing. The writer assumes that this study becomes a useful research
and makes students understand about grammar.
B.
The Problems of Study
Based on explanations above, the problems of the study are formulated as
following:
1. What are the types of the graduate students‟ syntactical errors in writing
thesis?
2. What are the dominant types of the graduate students‟ syntactical errors in
writing thesis?
5
C.
The Objectives of Study
Related to the problems, the objectives of this study are to find out:
1. The types of the graduate students‟ syntactical errors in writing
thesis
2. The dominant types of the graduate students‟ syntactical errors in
writing thesis.
D. The Scope of Study
The study is limited on the area of error which is focused on syntax based on
the classification of surface strategy taxonomy proposed by Dulay, Burt, and
Krashen based on Politzer and Romirez theory as guideline. The analysis of
syntactical errors are limited in the area of chapter 1, chapter 3, chapter 4 and
chapter 5.
E.
The Significance of Study
The findings of this study are expected to be useful. The benefits of this
study are:
Theoretically, the result of the research can be a reference for those who want to
conduct a research in Error Analysis especially in analyzing writing. Practically,
the writer hopes that this study will be useful for:
1. The students, to enrich their knowledge and understanding in identifying
the types of errors and to avoid making the errors over and over.
2. The other researchers, to enrich their knowledge about errors. It will give
clear understanding about them so they can study and analyze deeply.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
In this chapter, the writer presents the conclusions and suggestions dealing
with the data analysis of the research.
A.
Conclusions
Based on the data analysis that has been presented in the previous chapter,
the writer concludes this study based on the problem of the study. They can be
seen as follows:
1. All types of syntactical errors are available on that thesis analysis. Based
on the surface strategy taxonomy analysis, the result of the analysis shows
that the total number of errors in syntax is 387. They are 156 sentences
errors of omission, 46 sentences errors of addition, 114 sentences errors of
misformation, 19 sentences errors of misorder and 52 sentences errors of
transformation.
2. The most dominant type of syntactical error in the six theses is omission
type. Within the errors of omission, omission of third singular inflection to
show the agreement of subject. The errors found show the students often
make errors in forming verb (agreement of subject and verb) in sentences.
3. the errors found are small but significant
43
44
B.
Suggestions
Based on the significances of the study, this study aims to give benefit
contribution as the following:
1. Students, this study will give new information that will be useful for their
learning process of syntax field. They also know what aspect in grammar
which is difficult for them, so they can improve their studying. .
2. Researchers who are interested in the same research to study
and analyze the syntax field deeply. The writer hopes that the next
researchers analyze the other aspects, which are not covered in this study
yet, it could be in writing text with each genre, writing application letter, or
other writings.
3. Proof readers, this study is useful so that they can help the other
researchers to correct the writing’s structures