An error analysis on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students` descriptive texts.

(1)

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON SMP PANGUDI LUHUR YOGYAKARTA SEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

Yustian Pristantyo Student Number: 081214068

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

(2)

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON SMP PANGUDI LUHUR YOGYAKARTA SEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

Yustian Pristantyo Student Number: 081214068

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

(3)

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON SMP PANGUDI LUHUR YOGYAKARTA SEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS

Yustian Pristantyo Student Number: 081214068

Approved by

Advisor

(4)

iii

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON SMP PANGUDI LUHUR YOGYAKARTA SEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE WRITING

Yustian Pristantyo Student Number: 081214068

Defended before the Board of Examiners on August 15th, 2013

and Declared Acceptable

Board of Examiners

Chairperson : Caecilia Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd. ____________ Secretary : Drs. Barli Bram, M.Ed., Ph.D. ____________ Member : Agustinus Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A. ____________ Member : Drs. Pius Nurwidasa Prihatin, M.Ed., Ed.D.____________ Member : Caecilia Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd. ____________

Yogyakarta, August 15th, 2013

Faculty of Teachers Training and Education Sanata Dharma University

Dean,

(5)

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the references, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, August 15th, 2013 The Writer

Yustian Pristantyo 081214068

(6)

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN

PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS Yang bertandatangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:

Nama : Yustian Pristantyo Nomor Mahasiswa : 081214068

Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:

An Error Analysis on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta Seventh Grade Students’ Descriptive Texts

beserta alat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di Internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.

Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya.

Dibuat di Yogyakarta

Pada tanggal: 15 Agustus 2013

Yang menyatakan

(7)

vi ABSTRACT

Pristantyo, Yustian. 2013. An Error Analysis on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta Seventh Grade Students’ Descriptive Texts. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

Student’s writing ability is very important to sustain student’s achievement in English subject. Meanwhile, the students certainly make errors in their texts. The research utilized descriptive text to investigate students’ errors. This research also focused on the students’ errors in descriptive texts.

This study discussed two problem formulations. The first one is SMP Pangudi Luhur seventh grade students’ errors in descriptive texts. The second one is possible causes of errors of SMP Pangudi Luhur seventh grade students. The researcher employed worksheets to gather the necessary data. The research instruments were 55 students’ worksheets.

This research was an error analysis. To answer the first question, all students’ worksheets were examined in order to find sentences and words that contained errors. Afterward, the researcher classified the errors found in the students’ sentences to three main categories: syntax errors, morphological errors, and other findings. Each main category was also divided into some subcategories. The error categorization was based on Linguistic Category Taxonomy by Politzer and Ramirez as cited by Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982). To answer the second question, the researcher finished examining and categorizing students’ errors and afterward, the researcher concluded the possible causes of errors from the result of students’ worksheets examination. There were five possible causes of errors based on Norrish’s (1983).

Based on the result of this research, some conclusions were drawn. From the discussion on the first question, the researcher concluded that syntax errors are the students’ area of difficulty. Syntax errors (63.18%) had the highest percentage compared to morphological errors (19.81%) and other findings (17 %). Most of the found errors dealt with omission and addition. The possible causes of students’ errors were basic grammar understanding of the students, overgeneralization, students’ carelessness, incomplete application of rules, and first language interference. The suggestions for the teacher are to employ various techniques of teaching and to provide more exposure to grammar and English texts. The suggestions for the students are to grow students’ motivation and interest of English subject, to be aware of their English errors and to increases exposure of English texts.

Keywords: errors, descriptive texts, error analysis, Linguistic Category Taxonomy.

(8)

vii ABSTRAK

Pristantyo, Yustian. 2013. An Error Analysis on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta Seventh Grade Students’ Descriptive Texts. Yogyakarta: Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Keahlian menulis siswa sangatlah penting dalam mempertahankan prestasi siswa dalam mata pelajaran bahasa Inggris. Sementara itu, para siswa pastilah membuat kekeliruan dalam karangan mereka. Penelitian ini terpusat pada kekeliruan-kekeliruan siswa dalam karangan deskriptif.

Penelitian ini membahas dua rumusan masalah. Rumusan masalah yang pertama adalah kekeliruan siswa kelas tujuh SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta dalam teks deskriptif. Rumusan masalah yang kedua adalah penyebab-penyebab dari kekeliruan siswa yang mungkin. Peneliti menggunakan kertas kerja siswa. Instrumen penelitian yang digunakan berjumlah 55 kertas kerja siswa.

Penelitian ini adalah analisa kekeliruan. Untuk menjawab rumusan masalah pertama, kertas kerja siswa yang terkumpul diperiksa untuk mencari kalimat-kalimat dan kata-kata yang keliru. Setelah itu, peneliti mengelompokkan kekeliruan yang ditemukan dalam tiga kategori utama: kekeliruan sintaks, kekeliruan morfologis, dan temuan lain. Pengelompokan kekeliruan ini berdasar dari Linguistic Category Taxonomy oleh Dulay, Burt dan Krashen (1982). Untuk menjawab rumusan masalah kedua, peneliti menyelesaikan pemeriksaan dan pengelompokan kekeliruan siswa dan setelah itu, peneliti menyimpulkan penyebab-penyebab kekeliruan dari pemeriksaan pekerjaan siswa. Terdapat lima penyebab kekeliruan siswa yang didasarkan pada pernyataan John Norrish (1983).

Berdasarkan hasil dari penelitian ini, peneliti membuat beberapa kesimpulan. Dari pembahasan rumusan masalah pertama, peneliti menyimpulkan bahwa kekeliruan sintaks merupakan kesulitan utama siswa. Kekeliruan sintaks (61,6%) mempunyai persentase tertinggi dibandingkan dengan kekeliruan morfologis (20,7%) dan temuan lain (16,3%). Mayoritas kekeliruan yang ada berhubungan dengan penambahan dan pengurangan. Penyebab kekeliruan siswa yang mungkin adalah pemahaman dasar siswa akan tata bahasa, generalisasi berlebihan, kelalaian siswa, penerapan tidak lengkap dari aturan yang ada, dan pengaruh bahasa ibu. Saran untuk guru yaitu untuk menggunakan beragam teknik pengajaran dan memberikan paparan yang lebih banyak akan tata bahasa dan teks-teks bahasa Inggris. Saran untuk siswa yaitu untuk menumbuhkan minat terhadap pelajaran bahasa Inggris, sadar akan kekeliruan yang dilakukan dan meningkatkan pemaparan akan teks-teks bahasa Inggris.

Kata Kunci: kekeliruan , teks deskriptif, analisa kekeliruan, Linguistic Category Taxonomy.

(9)

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the enormous help given in finishing this research. I would like to thank Jesus Christ for His unconditional love and mercy that brought me into this big step of mine. I would not be able to finish this thesis without His blessings surrounding me every single day. The completion of this thesis was definitely because of the support and encouragement from advisor, lecturers, family and friends.

I would like to deliver my sincere and deepest gratitude to my research advisor, Agustinus Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A. for his great patience in my ‘come back’, guidance, constructive feedbacks, suggestions, encouragement, motivation and support for me in finishing this thesis. My gratitude also goes to all PBI lecturers of Sanata Dharma University who have given me great knowledge to support me in future life.

I also would like to thank the headmaster SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta, Bruder Valentinus Naryo FIC, M.Pd., for his warm welcome, approval and support to me in conducting this research and the English teacher of SMP Pangudi Luhur, Bondan Rachmat Subagya, S.Pd., who has given me chances and great help in conducting this research. I also would like to thank Bu Priscillia Linawati, S.Pd., M.Pd., Maria Ivona Purwa Susanti, S.Pd., Margareta Okta Paulina, S.Pd., and Realino Oscar Artana, S.Pd., for providing me helpful information of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta and supporting me to conduct this research.

(10)

My special gratitude goes to My Father (Late) Toesmono who has guided and inspired me from heaven since I entered college and my Mother Endang Setyowati for the great compassion and everlasting love given to me during my college life. I would like to thank my sister, Adisti Herliningtyas, S.S., for supporting and encouraging me in finishing this thesis. I also dedicate this thesis to my budhe, (Late) Toesnindarti, who could not see my graduation and had great patience supporting me from heaven.

My special thanks go to Caroline Niken Hapsari, who has accompanied me through difficult times in finishing this thesis with her great love and patience. I thank her for supporting and reminding me to finish this thesis. I also would like to thank ‘Wuluh Squad’ (Ahsan, Brian, Dimas, Novianto and Dodi) and ‘Tutul Squad’ (Ahsan, Dendot, Didin, Monjali, Galih, Deni) for giving me great help and support to finish this thesis. My gratitude also goes to Christian, Sebastian, Mari, Bruder Makus, Sekar and Leo as my ‘Brothers and Sister in Arms’ of thesis struggle for sharing togetherness and help.

The last is I would like to give thanks to all my friends of English Language Education Study Program (especially Class A,B and C of PBI Batch 2008), Rendezvous team, Bright Company ( Ratna, Ika, Tania, Yosua), Micro Teaching Lab Assistants (Seto, Boni, Nico, Paskalis, Adit, Andri), FKIP Dean officers (Mas Antok, mas Agus, Mbak Agnes, Endarto and Dhea), and ‘Power Rangers’ (Beni, Adhi Vrater, Yosua, Adam and Sherly) for the friendship, laughter and care.

(11)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE ... i

PAGE OF APPROVAL ... ii

PAGE OF ACCEPTANCE ... iii

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... iv

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ... v

ABSTRACT ... vi

ABSTRAK ... vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... x

LIST OF FIGURES ... ..xii

LIST OF TABLES ... xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiv

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ... 1

A. Research Background ... 1

B. Research Problems ... 4

C. Problem Limitation ... 4

D. Research Objectives ... 5

E. Research Benefits ... 5

F. Definition of Terms ... 7

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ... 12

A. Theoretical Description ... 12 1. Error Analysis ... 12

2. Error and Mistakes ... 16

3. Sources of Error ... 18

4. Causes of Errors ... 19

(12)

6. Error Taxonomy (Linguistic Category Taxonomy) ... 28

7. Descriptive Texts ... 29

B. Theoretical Framework ... 30

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 33

A. Research Method ... 33

B. Research Setting ... 34

C. Research Participant ... 34

D. Research Instrument ... 37

E. Data Gathering Technique ... 38

F. Data Analysis Technique... 38

G. Research Procedure ... 40

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... ₄₃

A. Errors Made on Descriptive Texts by Seventh Grade Students of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta ... 43

B. Possible Causes of Errors Made on Descriptive Texts by Seventh Grade Students of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta .. 72

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... ₇₅

A. Conclusions ... 75

B. Suggestions ... 77

REFERENCES ... ₇₉

(13)

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Figures Page

3.1 A Weighted Descriptive Texts Rubric adapted from Brown (2007) ... 35

3.2. The Error Classification Table ... 39

4.1. Syntax Errors and Frequency ... 45

4.2. Morphological Errors and Frequency ... 46

4.3. Other Findings and Frequency ... 46

4.4. Number of Errors in Use of Determiners ... 48

4.5. Number of Errors in Use of Prepositions ... 53

4.6. Number of Errors in Use of Pronouns ... 54

4.7. Number of Errors in Use of Verbs ... 57

4.8. Number of Errors in Subject-Verb Agreement ... 60

4.9. Number of Errors in Use of Lexical Categories ... 62

4.10. Number of Errors in Possessive Case ... 67

4.11. Number of Errors in Noun (Singular and Plural) ... 68

4.12. Number of Errors in Use of Suffix ... 70

4.13. The Examples of Ortographic Errors ... 71

(14)

xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Examples of Students’ Errors ... 82

APPENDIX B

Students’ Exercise of Descriptive Text and a Brief Summary of

Descriptive text ... .91

APPENDIX C

Examples of Students’ Descriptive Text ... 97

APPENDIX D

(15)

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the researcher will introduce the field and the background of his research. There are six parts in which the researcher presents the basic information of the research. Those are the research background, problem formulation, problem limitation, research objectives, research benefits and definition of terms used in the research.

A. Research Background

Students‟ writing ability is very important toward the students‟ progress. Students‟ writing ability is also very important for the students themselves in their upcoming years. As the students learn writing, there must be an outcome of that process. The outcome could be students‟ improved writing skill, students‟ writing scores and also students‟ writing errors. Brooks (1960) as cited by Hendrickson (1981: 1) stated that errors have relationship with learning: “Like sin, error is to be avoided and its influence overcome, but its presence is to be expected”. Based on Brooks‟ statement (1960), it is known errors are things that normally happen in every part of learning. Errors are also beneficial in learning process as supported by Corder (1973: 265) as cited by Hendrickson (1981: 3) as follows.

“Errors provide feedback, they tell the teacher something about the effectiveness of

his teaching materials and his teaching techniques, and show what parts of the syllabus he has been following have been inadequately learned or taught and need further attention. They enable him to decide whether he must devote more time to

(16)

This research was an Error Analysis and conducted based on one purpose. It was to identify the errors in SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students‟ descriptive texts. This research was conducted because the researcher proposed to investigate the errors in SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students‟ descriptive texts. The researcher decided to conduct this research because students‟ errors in writing are important to be investigated. Students‟ errors are disastrous for the students if they are not immediately taken care of.

This research also helped the teacher to pinpoint parts of his teaching which still needs more emphasis in order to overcome the students‟ errors. This research also provided feedback in form of list of errors for the teacher as stated previously by Corder (1973). Zydatiss (1974), Lange (1977), and Lantolf (1977) as cited by Hendrickson (1981) stated that errors are signals that actual learning is taking place and errors can serve as indicators of progress and success. Therefore, this research also presented indicators of students‟ writing achievement in descriptive texts.

In this research, the researcher had three regular seventh grade classes consisting of 43-44 students each class for this research. The reason why the researcher chose regular classes was that because the teacher wanted to seek out the students‟ progress in writing, especially descriptive texts. It was because descriptive text was taught in both semesters. In the odd semester, the students were taught about describing person‟s appearances and characteristics. Then, in the even semester, the students were taught about describing places. Moreover, the teacher also wanted the students to recall what they had learned about

(17)

3 descriptive text in the odd semester by using material enrichment before they learned about describing places.

In this research, the researcher utilized descriptive text for identifying the occurred errors. The reason why the researcher chose descriptive text was because the students of seventh grade junior high school were required to be able to make a good composition of descriptive text. That statement is stated in Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP) syllabus. Descriptive text is also one important kind of texts because through this kind of text, the students can use and explore their sensory details like smells, sound, sights, feeling, tastes, and textures to create vivid images in reader‟s mind as stated by Henry, D. J. (2008). Descriptive texts enable the students to explore their vocabulary and senses, especially in describing a person. The researcher provided four famous characters and the students were required to describe one of them.

In this research, there were errors found on the students‟ descriptive texts. One of the errors which mostly occurred in these three regular classes was that the omission of articles. That problem was quite serious, because the students‟ understanding of using article would affect the students‟ writing result in their upcoming time. Besides the use of article, there were found many other errors that also were important to identify such as the use of preposition, the omission of suffix and any other else. Those errors are important and valuable; because identifying those errors could locate in which part the students were facing difficulties and the teacher could take some follow-up actions toward the students‟

(18)

difficulties. The teacher could also make preventive actions towards those errors for his future students.

The benefit of this research toward the teacher was that it could help the teacher locate the students‟ weaknesses and the teacher could revise and emphasize on which the students were facing difficulties. This research also assisted the students with lists of students‟ errors. Therefore, the students could know which part to be fixed in their writing. The students were expected to be aware of their errors occurred in their descriptive texts and prevent their errors in their upcoming time.

B. Research Problem

This research comes up with two problems. They are formulated as follows. 1. What are the errors made on descriptive texts by seventh grade students of

SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta?

2. What are the possible causes of errors made on descriptive texts by seventh grade students of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta?

C. Problem Limitation

This research is limited only in an Error Analysis on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students‟ descriptive texts academic year 2012/2013. The researcher chose this type of research because errors in writing would give a disastrous impact if these problems were not immediately taken care of. The students needed to know their weaknesses in all part of English subject, in this

(19)

5 case, descriptive texts. They needed to know the errors they made because the errors would show their weaknesses on a particular section. Therefore, they can improve their writing based on the Error Analysis‟ result.

Furthermore, the researcher would examine the results of the material enrichment (materi pengayaan) which has been given in order to elaborate what kinds or errors and how many errors which appeared in students‟ descriptive texts. This research would be beneficial for the teacher in order to improve students‟ skills in writing. It also could make the students be aware of their grammar ability and through this research; they were expected to improve their writing skill and grammar acquisition afterwards.

D. Research Objective

This research objective is to find out the answers of the questions stated in problem formulation as follows.

1. The errors made on descriptive texts by seventh grade students of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta.

2. The possible causes of errors made on descriptive texts by seventh grade students of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta

E. Research Benefit

This research was expected to be beneficial for the teacher, the researcher, and the students.

(20)

1. The teacher

This research was conducted based on students‟ errors. The problem was about writing errors in students‟ descriptive texts. The teacher will get the benefit of this research through the research result. The teacher can emphasize more on some parts of descriptive texts, grammar, or writing which the students were facing difficulties in. According to Corder (1973), errors analysis could provide useful information about the teacher‟s technique effectiveness. Therefore, the teachers could improve their technique in teaching, especially for writing. Using this research‟ result, the teacher could locate the students‟ weaknesses in descriptive texts, writing and also grammar. Corder (1981: 10) also stated the benefit of Error Analysis as follows. “First to the teacher, in that they tell him, if he undertakes a systematic analysis, how far towards the goal the learner has progressed and, consequently, what remains for him to learn”. Afterwards, the teacher could take some preventive actions toward the students‟ errors.

2. The Researcher

This research was conducted by the researcher as a thesis to obtain Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. This research was also beneficial for the researcher, because this research enabled the researcher to elaborate more SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students‟ errors through Error Analysis. The problem of this research was errors in students‟ descriptive texts. The researcher attempted to identify and analyze the errors found on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh

(21)

7 grade students‟ descriptive text. Corder (1981: 11) also stated the Error Analysis benefit for the researcher as follows. “They provide to the researcher evidence of how language is learnt or acquired, what strategies or procedures the learner is employing in his discovery of the language”.

3. The Students

The seventh grade students of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta were expected to be able to improve their writing skill, in this case, descriptive text. Corder (1981: 11) stated the Error Analysis benefit for the students as follows.

“They are indispensable to the learner himself, because we can regard the

making of errors as a device the learner uses in order to learn. It is a way the learner has of testing his hypotheses about the nature of the language he is learning. The making of errors then is a strategy employed both by

children acquiring their mother tongue and by those learning a second language.”

This research also helped the students recognize their errors in their descriptive texts. The students also can elaborate on their errors with the teacher‟s assistance: why the errors happened in their writing, how to overcome those errors and etc. The students could conduct peer-assessment in their classes assisted by the teacher. Therefore, the students could correct their errors and improve their writing skill in future time. Through this research, the students were expected to overcome their errors and produce improved descriptive texts in the upcoming time.

F. Definitions of Terms

In order to avoid misconception and misunderstanding, the researcher gives the specific terms.

(22)

1. Writing

In this study, writing is a method of expressing ideas about any subject content; it appears in classrooms everywhere and, therefore, must be the concern of every teacher (Tiedt, 1989). Writing is one kind of productive skill in English language acquisition. Maggie (2003) defined writing as both a process and a product. In writing, there is a process to make a writing composition. The processes are stated chronologically: imagining- organizing- drafting- editing- reading and proofreading.

Writing has a process to follow in order to obtain the best result. Besides a process, writing is also a product. This is called similar to that fact because writing skill is a productive skill and as a result, writing has a result in form of a writing composition. The researcher tended to assume that writing is a product, because in this research, the research samples were the SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students‟ descriptive texts. In this research, the researcher only examined 55 students‟ descriptive texts in order to identify the errors and provide feedback for the teacher.

2. Descriptive Text

In this study, the term descriptive text is understood as a kind of text that enables SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade to visualize a person with all appropriate senses and describe the person‟s personality. McMurrey (1983: 239) points out that description is a way to enable the reader to visualize a person, place or things with some appropriate senses included. In this study, descriptive

(23)

9 texts enabled the students to visualize famous characters they were interested in. Therefore, the students were expected to be able to explore more their writing compositions through their descriptive texts. Other definition of descriptive text by Gerot, L. and Wignell, P. (1994) as cited by Mursyid (n.d.) is that descriptive text is a kind of text which has a purpose to give information. The context of this text is the description of particular thing, animal, person or others. The social function of descriptive text is to describe particular person, place or thing.

Descriptive text also has its generic structure as stated by Hammond (1992) as cited by Mursyid (n.d.). There are two main parts of the generic structure: Identification and Description. In identification, the phenomenon to be described is identified and in description, the phenomenon is described by parts, qualities, characteristics and etc. In this research, the researcher descriptive text about people‟s appearance and character. According to Berg (2011), descriptive texts can indicate who is in the picture. Descriptive texts actually can provide better face labeling in describing person. Berg (2011) also stated that descriptive texts can indicate appearance characteristics. Descriptive texts can discover visual attributes. Through descriptive, SMP Pangudi Luhur seventh grade students were expected to be able describe a person in details. This describing person‟s appearance and character material had been taught in the odd semester of academic year 2012-2013. In the even semester, the researcher still attempted to conduct a research related to descriptive texts and Error Analysis as the teacher intended to check students‟ progress before going on describing places topic.

(24)

3. Error Analysis

In this study, Error Analysis was proposed by the researcher as a way to investigate the errors occurred in students‟ descriptive texts of seventh grade of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta. Crystal (2003: 165) as cited by Abed (2012) defined Error Analysis as “technique for identifying, classifying and systematically interpreting the unacceptable forms produced by someone learning a foreign language, using any of the principles and provided by linguistics”. In addition, Keshavarz (2012: 168) as cited by Abed (2012) defined Error Analysis as “a procedure used by both researchers and teachers which involves collecting samples of learner language, identifying errors, classifying them according to their nature and causes, and evaluating their seriousness”.

This research is an Error Analysis. The researcher took students‟ worksheets as the object of his research. The researcher intended to search for the errors that occurred in the students‟ descriptive texts. Corder (1967) as cited by Ellis (1994: 78) stated the differences between mistakes and errors. He stated mistakes as “mistakes are akin to slips of the tongue”. He also stated errors are systematic and likely to happen repeatedly. Norrish (1983) definederrors. An error is when a learner has not learnt something and consistently „gets it wrong‟. Error Analysis also has its own benefits. Norrish (1983) stated that Error Analysis can give a picture of the type of difficulty learners are experiencing. The other benefits of errors analysis stated by Norrish (1983) are an Error Analysis can give useful information about a new class, an Error Analysis can indicate problems common to all and problems common to particular groups, and the teacher can

(25)

11 assess objectively how his teaching helps the students. The researcher implemented the steps of Error Analysis by Corder (1974) as cited by Ellis (1994) in this research. Those steps helped the researcher conduct this research. The researcher also added additional steps of Error Analysis by Gass and Selinker (2001) in order to obtain a reliable research result.

(26)

12 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES

In this chapter, the researcher presents the related theories and literatures that underline the research field. The related literatures are discussed here as the basis of answering the research question. There are two parts presented in this chapter. They are the theoretical description and the theoretical framework. In the theoretical description, the researcher presents theories related to error analysis, error and mistakes, sources of errors, causes of errors, error taxonomy, types of errors, and descriptive text. In the theoretical framework, the researcher presents the steps of conducting an error analysis on students‟ descriptive texts.

A. Theoretical Description

In this part the researcher discusses some fundamental theories of this research.

1. Error Analysis

Crystal (2003: 165) as cited by Abed (2012) defined error analysis as “technique for identifying, classifying and systematically interpreting the unacceptable forms produced by someone learning a foreign language, using any of the principles and provided by linguistics”. Keshavarz (2012: 168) as cited by Abed (2012) defined error analysis as “a procedure used by both researchers and teachers which involves collecting samples of learner language, identifying errors, classifying them according to their nature and causes, and evaluating their

(27)

13 seriousness”. In error analysis, there are steps to follow. Corder(1974) as cited by Ellis (1994) stated the steps of errors analysis. They are presented as follows.

a. Collection of a sample of learner language

Ellis (1994: 49) stated that “the starting point in EA is deciding what samples of learner language to use for the analysis and how to collect these samples”. Ellis (1994) also stated that there are three kinds of samples‟ size. They are massive sample, specific sample, and incidental sample. Ellis (1994: 49) stated the differences of three kinds of samples‟ size as follows.

“A massive sample involves collecting several samples of language use from a

large number of learners in order to compile a comprehensive list of errors,

representative of the entire population. A specific sample consists of one sample of language use collected from a limited number of learners, while an incidental

sample involves only one sample of language use produced by a single learner.”

Besides the matter of samples‟ size, Ellis (1994) stated that the researcher also needs to pay attention on a variety of factors that the learners make errors.The researcher also has to decide regarding the manner in which the samples are taken. Ellis (1994: 50) stated that “an important distinction is whether the learner language reflects natural, spontaneous language use, or is elicited in some way. The researcher also has to decide whether to collect the samples cross-sectionally (one point at a time) or longitudinally (successive points over a period of time) (Ellis, 1994). Svartvik (1973b) as cited by Ellis (1994) stated that most error analyses use regular examination papers (composition, translations, etc.)

b. Identification of Errors

Identification of errors is carried out after all samples are taken. The first phase in identification is to decide which variety of target language should be the norm (Ellis, 1994). In this phase, the researcher also should consider the mother

(28)

tongue and the target language of the learners. In phase two, the researcher is required to differentiate between errors and mistakes. Then, in phase three, Corder (1971a) as cited by Ellis (1994) suggested that the researcher also has to concern whether the errors are overt (clear deviation form) or covert (superficially well-formed but not reflecting the learners‟ intention). In phase four, the researcher also has to decide to investigate deviations in correctness or also deviations in appropriateness. Those phases are the steps in identification of errors.

c. Description of errors

Ellis (1994: 54) stated that “the description of learner errors involves a comparison of the learner‟s idiosyncratic utterances with a reconstruction of those utterances in the target language”. Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982) as cited by Ellis (1994) argue the need for descriptive taxonomies that focus only on observable, surface features of errors, as a basis for subsequent explanation. In description of errors, the researcher needs to use error taxonomy to describe the learners‟ errors in detail.

One of error taxonomies is linguistic category taxonomy by Politzer and Ramirez (1973). Politzer and Ramirez (1973) as cited by Ellis (1994) set their taxonomy with more general categories: morphology, syntax and vocabulary. This taxonomy allows for both a detailed description of specific errors and also for a quantification of a corpus of errors. In description of errors, the researcher also needs to quantify the errors that occurred. Schachter and Celce-Murcia (1977) as cited by Ellis (1994: 57) point out “to say anything worthwhile about error

(29)

15 frequency we need to know the number of times it would be possible for learners to have committed different errors”.

d. Explanation of Errors

Ellis (1994) stated that explanation of errors is concerned with establishing the sources of the error. In explanation of errors, the researcher is required to seek out the sources of students‟ errors based on the collected errors. Taylor (1986) as cited by Ellis (1994) discovers three sources of errors. They are psycholinguistic, sociolinguistic, epistemic and discourse. Psycholinguistic sources deal with the nature of the L2 knowledge system and the learners‟ difficulties in using the L2 knowledge system. Sociolinguistic sources deal with learners‟ ability in adjusting their language in accordance with the social context. Epistemic sources deal with learners‟ of world knowledge. Discourse sources deal with problems in organization of information into a coherent „text‟.

Richards (1971b) as cited by Ellis (1994) also provides the sources of errors. The first one is interference errors. Interference errors occur as a result of the use of elements from one language while speaking another. The second is intralingual errors. Intralingual errors reflect the general characteristics of rule learning such as faulty generalization, incomplete application of rules and failure to learn conditions under which rules apply. The third is developmental errors. Developmental errors occur when the learner attempts to build up hypotheses about the target language on the basis of limited experience. Those sources of errors are for the consideration in explaining the students‟ errors.

(30)

e. Evaluating Errors

Evaluating errors is the last step in error analysis. Ellis (1994: 63) stated that “error evaluation involves a consideration of the effect that errors have on the person(s) addressed”. Ellis (1994) also stated the design of error evaluation. Error evaluation involves addressees, judges, errors to be judged and how to judge. The error judgment covers semantic or lexical aspects of English, grammatical features and spelling. In this research, the error evaluation was carried out by the teacher based on the result of description and explanation of students‟ errors. The researcher only assisted the teacher to identify the students‟ errors, therefore, the teacher could take evaluate his teaching and take some precaution actions towards the result of students‟ errors.

Other steps of error analysis were also proposed by Gass and Selinker (2001). The steps are: (1) data need to be collected, (2) identify errors, (3) classify errors, (4) quantify errors, (5) analysis of the source, and (6) remediation. The steps of error analysis both by Richards (1971b) and by Gass and Selinker (2001) share the same characteristics. In this research, the researcher primarily used Richards‟ (1971b) steps and also considered Gass and Selinker‟s (2001) steps.

2. Error and Mistakes

The researcher considered that his research is an error analysis. Therefore, he provided the theories related to error. Corder (1974) as cited by Ellis (1994)stated that the researcher has to differentiate between errors and mistakes in identification of errors. Therefore, the researcher presents the theories related to

(31)

17 error and mistakes. Norrish (1983) distinguishes between error, mistake, lapse and careless slip as they are known as “types of error”. They are explained as follows. a. Error

Error is when a learner has not learnt something and consistently „gets it wrong‟. Norrish (1983) also mentions that in the same way, an ESL student makes an error systemically, that is because the student has not learnt the correct form. Norrish (1983) calls errors as “systematic deviations”.Corder (1967) as cited by Ellis (1994: 51) stated that “an error takes place when the deviation arises as a result of lack knowledge. It represents a lack of competence”. Errors occur as the result of students‟ lack of competence. Gass and Selinker (2001: 78) state that “an error, on the other hand, is systematic. That is, it is likely to occur repeatedly and is not recognized by the learner as an error”. In order to differentiate between errors and mistakes accurately, Ellis (1994)stated that frequency of occurrence is regarded the distinctive point. Error has high frequency of occurrence. Corder (1967) as cited by Dulay et al (1982) stated that errors are obviously systematic deviations.

b. Mistake

Norrish (1983) stated that a mistake occurs when a learner has been taught an English sentence pattern, and he uses the correct pattern and sometimes he uses the incorrect pattern. If that situation happens quite inconsistently and later that situation is called “inconsistent deviation” or “mistake”.Gass and Selinker (2001) also define mistakes as akin to slips of the tongue. Mistakes are generally one-time-only events. The learner who makes mistakes is able to recognize it as a

(32)

mistake and correct it if necessary. Corder (1967) as cited by Dulay et al (1982) stated that performance errors are apparently mistakes.

c. Lapse

Norrish (1983) also presents lapse. Lapse happens because of the lack of concentration, shortness of memory, fatigue and other factors. Lapse happens when the students do not obtain a good atmosphere and situation of learning for example due to the weather, or other particular situations. Lapse is neither an error nor a mistake and lapse can happen to anyone at any time.

d. Careless Slip

Norrish (1983) also stated careless slip. Careless slip is caused by learner‟s inattentiveness in class. Learner‟s inattentiveness could be triggered by many factors. The factors are class‟ situation, learners‟ concerns and any other else. Careless slip is considered as a minor type of „errors‟.

3. Sources of Error

In this research, the researcher also presents the theories about sources of error. The theories are presented in order to give clear explanation for the students‟ error in descriptive texts. Sources of errors are needed in the step of error analysis. The step is explanation of errors by Ellis (1994).

Brown (1980) as cited by Hasyim(2002) presents the sources or errors. Brown (1980) classifies the sources of errors into four. They are: (1) Interlingual Transfer. This is negative influence of students‟ mother tongue. (2) Intralingual Transfer. This is negative transfer of items in the target language. In other word,

(33)

19 this is the incorrect use of rules in the target language. (3) Context of Learning. This is the overlapping of the interlanguage transfer and intralingual transfer. The role of teacher and textbook is very important, because teachers and textbooks might make wrong generalization about the language.(4) Communication Strategies. Communication strategies are used as a conscious verbal mechanism for communicating when linguistics forms are not available to the students for some reasons.

Richards (1971b) as cited by Ellis (1994: 58) also presents three sources of errors. They are (1)interference errors. „Interference errors occur as a result of the use of elements from one language while speaking another‟. (2) Intralingual errors. „intralingualerrors reflect the general characteristics of rule learning such as faulty generalization, incomplete application of rules and failure to learn conditions under which rules apply‟. (3) Developmental errors.„Developmental errors occur when the learner attempts to build up hypotheses about the target language on the basis of limited experience‟.

4. Causes of Errors

Norrish (1983) presents the causes of error. That is essential because those causes could explain the error made by seventh grade students of SMP PangudiLuhur Yogyakarta.Those causes are presented as follows.

a. Carelessness

Norrish (1983)stated that carelessness is often done due to lack of motivation. Another reason is that the teachers‟ materials do not suit the students‟

(34)

capabilities. One aid to overcome those “carelessness” problems is to get the students to check each other‟s work. This activity requires the students‟ capabilities in English and English can be used as a class language in this activity. b. First Language Interference

Norrish (1983)stated that learning language whether it is a mother tongue or a foreign language is a matter of habit formation. The learners‟ utterances were elaborated to be gradually shaped towards the language they were learning. Skinner (1957) as cited by Norrish (1983) stated a definitive statement of behaviorist theory of language learning. It says that a language is essentially a set of habits, and then when the learners try to learn the new habits, the former habits will interfere with the new habits. That is called mother tongue interference. The most appropriate way for teachers to overcome the first language interference is to re-teach a given structure, or a piece of vocabulary, in a way which allows the students to see the language item from as many points of view as possible. In addition to that way, the student must have chance to use the items in an appropriate situation.

c. Translation

Norrish (1983) also says that another popular idea why students make errors is due to translation. The students often do word-by-word translation in translating idiomatic expression. Errors due to translation may occur during the discussion. It is where students have reached the stage of concentrating more on the message (things they want to deliver) than the code they are using to express it (the language itself). The use of conscious or unconscious translation can be

(35)

21 considered as a communication strategy. That means a learner can express himself in the language he is learning using „interlanguage‟ as bridge between his own language and the target language.

d. Overgeneralization

George (1972) as cited by Norrish (1983) explains an approach in study learner‟s errors. They are Overgeneralization by Richards (1974) and Redundancy Reduction by George (1972). The example of overgeneralization is that the students construct a deviant structure. Norrish (1983: 31) also stated that this error occur as “a blend of two structures in the „standard version‟ of the language” and also as “a result of blending structures learnt in the learning sequence”. Richards (1971b) as cited by Ellis (1994:59) says that “overgeneralization errors arise when the learner creates a deviant structure on the basis of other structures in the target language. Overgeneralization error generally involves the creation of one deviant structure in place of two target language structures”. The examples of overgeneralization are presented as follows.

e.g.: a. We are visit the zoo. b. She must goes.

c.Yesterday I walk to the shop and I buy. e. Incomplete Application of Rules

Richards (1974) as cited by Norrish (1983) adds another kind of errors and that is incomplete application of rules. In this kind of error, Richards (1974) as cited by Norrish (1983: 32) suggests two possible causes of this error. They are (1) “the use of questions in the classroom and (2) the fact that the learner may

(36)

discover that the learner can communicate perfectly adequately using deviant forms”. In this error, the students tend to use deviant forms of language. Richards (1971b) as cited by Ellis (1994: 59) also explains that “incomplete application of rules involves a failure to fully develop a structure.” Richards (1971b) as cited by Ellis (1994) also says that incomplete application of rules is included in intralingual errors. The examples of incomplete application of rules are presented below.

e.g.: Teacher: Ask her where she lives. Students: Where you (she) live(s)?

f. Material Induced Errors

Norrish (1983) also stated there are two reasons regarded material induced errors. The first is a “false concept” and the second is “ignorance of rule restrictions”.False concept occurs when the material do not use appropriate context to explain the learners. The example of false concept is the use of present progressive tense in descriptive texts. Richards (1971b) as cited by Ellis (1994: 59) explains that “false concepts hypothesized arise when the learner does not fully comprehend a distinction in the target language”. Richards (1971b) as cited by Ellis (1994: 59) also explains that “ignorance of rule restrictions involves the application of rules to the contexts where they do not apply”.It is probably more difficult to avoid errors from ignorance of rule restriction than it is to avoid false conceptualization.

(37)

23 g. Error as a part of language creativity

Norrish (1983) stated that the learners who have limited capability in English would form a hypothetical rules related to English on insufficient evidence. The learners need to create new utterances, but with limited capability, they may make mistakes or even errors. Language creativity is divided into two major factors. The first factor is that the students‟ incapability to follow the target language rules. The second factor is creative arts. It deals with some works on literature such poems, novels or prose.

The causes of errors by Norrish (1983) have been presented by the researcher. Those causes are essential because the origin of students can be found out by searching through those causes. In this research, the researcher also implements as Norrish (1983) suggested. It is to use correcting codes. The purpose of using correcting codes is that because correcting codes can lead the learners to work out for themselves what is wrong and to figure out some way towards correcting it. Norrish (1983) suggested some codes to correct students‟ writing. They are T (tense), WF (word form), WO (word order), S (syntax), A (agreement), V (vocabulary), Sp (spelling), P (punctuation), Art (article), R (reference unclear), St (style) and many more. The researcher made correcting codes which were adopted from Linguistic Category Taxonomy by Politzer and Ramirez cited by Dulay et al (1982). Those codes could facilitate the teacher to give comments in a more student-friendly way instead putting a bunch of red ink on students‟ writing.

(38)

5. Types of Errors

Dulay et al (1982) explain the types of errors. These theories of error type underline this error analysis. They are presented as follows.

a. Omission

Dulay et al (1982) stated that omission happens because of the absence of an item that must appear in well-formed utterance. Some morphemes are potential to be omitted in writing. They are two kinds of morpheme, content morpheme and grammatical morpheme. The phenomenon that is often seen is the omission of the grammatical morphemes. The grammatical morphemes are noun and verb inflections (the s- in birds), articles (a, an, the), verb auxiliaries (is, will, can, is, was, am, etc), and prepositions (in, on, under,etc.)

b. Additions

Dulay et al (1982) stated that addition errors are the opposite of omissions. In this type or errors, the errors are characterized by the presence of an item which must not appear in a well-formed utterance. This error happens because of the result of the too faithful use of certain rules. Additions are also divided into three different parts. They are double markings, regularizations, and simple additions. 1) Double Markings

In some cases, the students who have acquired the tensed form for auxiliary and verb often place the marker on both. Dulay et al (1982: 156) stated that “many addition errors are more accurately described as the failure to delete

(39)

25 certain items which are required in some linguistic constructions, but not in others”. The examples are he doesn’t knows my name or we didn’t knew about it.The error above is called double markings, because two items rather than one are marked for the same feature.

2) Regularization (additions)

Dulay et al (1982) say that a rule typically applies to all linguistic items, however, some members of a class are exception to the rule. Regularization errors that are included in the addition category are those in which a marker that is typically added to a linguistic item is erroneously added to exceptional items of the given class that do not take a marker. The examples of regularization errors are eat- eated instead of ate, beat- beatedinstead of beat, sheep-sheepsinstead of sheep, put-putted instead of put and etc.

3) Simple Addition

Simple addition is the last category of additions. If an addition error is neither a double marking nor a regularization error, it is called simple addition. This error is still based on adding unnecessary morphemes to sentences, and words. The examples of simple addition error are the train is gonnabroke it (past tense), a this (article a), and etc.

c. Misformation

Dulay et al (1982) stated that misformation errors are characterized by the use of wrong form of the morpheme or structure. The example of misformation errors is the dog eated the chicken. In that error, a past tense marker was added

(40)

while it is not necessary. Misformation is also divided in three parts. They are regularizations, archi-forms, and alternating forms.

1) Regularization Errors (misformation)

This error is caused by a regular marker used in a place if an irregular one. The examples are run- runnedinstead of run, goose- gooses instead of geese. Regularization errors occurred most in the verbal output of both first and second language learners. Dulay et al (1982: 160) also stated that “the overextension of linguistic rules to exceptional items occurs even after some facility with the language has been acquired”.

2) Archi forms

The selection of one member of a class of forms to represent others in the class is a common characteristic of all stages of second language acquisition. The students‟ selected forms are called archi forms. For example, the students choose one demonstrative adjective (that, these, those, this) to add with some words, thatcar- that cars.Dulay et al (1982) stated that “for the learner, that is the archi-demonstrative adjective representing the entire class of archi-demonstrative adjectives”. 3) Alternating forms.

These forms are still students‟ selected forms. This error happens because of the influence of the students‟ grammar-vocabulary grow. In this error, the students may alternate between the forms. The examples are those dog, this cats, he would have saw them, I seen her yesterday.

(41)

27 d. Misordering

Dulay et al (1982) state that misordering error is characterized by the incorrect placement of a morpheme or group of morphemes in an utterance.Misordering occurs systemically both in L1or L2 learners. For example, they produce wrong type of questions such what daddy is doing? The correct form is what is daddy doing?

e. Interlingual errors

Dulay et al (1982) stated that interlingual errors happen because the influence of students‟ native language. The sentences or words that are made are semantically similar or equivalent with the students‟ native language structure. For example, Spanish students may produce the man skinny, because they are influenced by their native language structure. That error is caused by the Spanish adjectival phrase (el hombre flaco).

f. Ambiguous Errors

Dulay et al (1982) stated that ambiguous errors are classified both as developmental error and interlingual error. This error reflects the students‟ native language structure and children acquiring first language. The example for this error is I no have car. In that example, it is shown that “no” shows two alternate error origin, the students‟ native language structure and also children acquiring first language.

(42)

6. Error Taxonomy (Linguistic Category Taxonomy)

This research is considered as an error analysis. Due to that fact, the researcher used Linguistic Category Taxonomy by Politzer and Ramirez (1973) asDulay et al suggest (1982). Dulay et al (1982) as cited by Ellis (1994: 54) argue “the need for descriptive taxonomies of errors that focus only on observable, surface features of errors, as a basis for subsequent explanation”. Ellis (1994) also stated that the simplest type of descriptive taxonomy is based on linguistic category.

Politzer and Ramirez (1973) as cited by Ellis (1994) begin their taxonomy with more general categories: morphology, syntax and vocabulary and they say that Linguistic Category Taxonomy allows for both a detailed description of specific errors and also for a quantification of a corpus of errors.The researcher used Linguistic Category Taxonomytoclassify the students‟ errors and using this taxonomy, the classification was faster and easier. The researcher used Linguistic Category Taxonomy to project the errors from general categories: syntax, morphology and other findings. Other findings consist of two kinds of errors: orthographic and lexico-semantic (Keshavarz, 2012as cited by Abed, 2012). After classified into generalcategories, the errors were, then, classified into some more specific categories such as omission, addition and etc, and it can enable the researcher to investigate deeper on the students‟ errors. The researcher also combined Linguistic Category Taxonomyby Politzer and Ramirez (1973) as cited by Dulay et al (1982) with types or errors by Dulay et al (1982) in order to classify the errors in students‟ descriptive texts.

(43)

29 7. Descriptive Texts

McMurrey (1983) defined descriptionas a term used rather loosely in ordinary conversation and it is used to explain person, place or things with providing sensory details. McMurrey (1983) also says that description is often combined with other kinds of writing, especially narration. The goal of description as stated by McMurrey (1983) is to enable the reader to visualize a person, place or thing and the details must be provided as many as possible.Descriptive text also has its generic structure as stated by Hammond (1992) as cited by Mursyid (n.d.). There are two main parts of the generic structure: Identification and Description. In identification, the phenomenon to be described is identified and in description, the phenomenon is described by parts, qualities, characteristics and etc.

Besides generic structure, descriptive text also has its language features as stated by Hammond (1992) as cited by Mursyid (n.d.). They are: (1)Descriptive texts focus on a specific participant. The examples are my favorite public figure, my beloved pet, and etc. Descriptive texts are made to describe one thing in detail.(2)Descriptive textsuse simple present tense. Simple present is used in descriptive texts because simple present tense explains general truth. Azar and Hagen (2009) define the simple present tense as follows.simple present expresses events or situations that always exist. The writer may use simple past tense if the thing to describe does not longer exist.

(3) Descriptive textsuseverbs of being and having. The examples are: My pet is really lovely. It has a soft beautiful white fur. Verbs of being and having make some relational processes in the descriptive texts. Therefore, the descriptive

(44)

texts may be coherently composed. (4) Descriptive textsuse descriptive adjectives. The examples of descriptive adjectives are white fur, strong legs, and black hair. Descriptive adjectives or attributive adjectives enable the writer to clearly describe the condition of item described. (5) Descriptive textsuse detailed noun phrase. The examples of detailed noun phrase arevery outstanding performance, sweet young lady, and etc. The purpose of using detailed noun phrase is to give information about the subject.

(6)Descriptive textsuse action verbs. The purpose of using action verbs is to explain material processes such asIt eats flesh, It runs slow.(6)Descriptive textsuse adverbials. The purpose of using adverbials isto give additional information about the behavior of the object of description such fast, at tree house (7) Descriptive textsuse figurative language. Figurative language is used to clearly describe the object of description. The kinds of figurative language are simile, metaphor, personification and etc. Another use of figurative language is to compare the object of description with something else. One example of figurative language is John is white as chalk.

B. Theoretical Framework

This research wasan error analysis on SMP PangudiLuhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students‟ descriptive texts. The researcher proposed to conduct an error analysis to investigate students‟ errors and find the possible causesof the students‟ errors. The researcher chose error analysis as a way to investigate errors in descriptive text. The researcher also employed some theories which are stated

(45)

31 in Chapter 2 to conduct this research. Those theories were used as guidance in examining students‟ errors.

The researcher implemented the steps of error analysis by Corder (1974) as cited Ellis (1994). Those steps were carried out one step at a time. In collecting samples, the researcher took massive samples because the samples which were taken covered three regular classes. Then, in identification of errors, the researcher searched all the errors and decided whether they are errors or mistakes. The researcher also decided to choose overt or covert errors to be investigated. After identifying the errors, the researcher described the occurred errors in description of errors. In description of errors, the researcher explained the errors with assistance from Linguistic Category Taxonomy by Politzer and Ramirez as cited by Dulay et al (1982). The researcher also used types of errors by Dulay et al (1982) such as omission, addition and etc to clearly explain the errors. In this step, the researcher also quantified errors that occurred as suggested by Ellis (1994) and also Gass and Selinker (2001). That process was carried out to reveal the most errors which the students produced. Then, in explanation of errors, the researcher revealed the sources of students‟ errors. The last step is evaluation of errors. However, the researcher did not carry out error evaluation because error evaluation is the teacher‟s duty. The researcher only provided feedbackin what extent the students committed errors and understood the descriptive texts.

The researcher continued to seek out the causes of SMP PangudiLuhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students‟ errors in descriptive texts. The theories were completely provided and the researcher used them to find out the real causes of

(46)

SMP PangudiLuhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students‟ errors in descriptive texts. The data gathering was conducted through students‟worksheets. The students‟ worksheets were collected from material enrichment (materipengayaan). The students‟ worksheets were taken by the teacher giving as an assignment. The students‟ worksheets were then examined with some error analysis aspects such as steps of error analysis, source of errors, causes of errors, and types of errors and also with Linguistic Category Taxonomy.

(47)

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researcher will present the research method, research setting, research participants, instrument and data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and research procedure.

A. Research Method

The research focused on errors which occurred in SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students’ descriptive texts. The purpose of this research was to investigate errors in descriptive texts committed by SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students and provide feedback for the teacher as Corder (1973) as cited by Hendrickson (1981) stated. This research was to showcase kinds of students’ errors in descriptive texts and provide valuable information and feedback for the teacher. In this research, the researcher followed the steps of error analysis by Corder (1974) as cited by Ellis (1994). The steps are: (1) collection of a sample learner language, (2) identification of errors, (3) description of errors, (4) explanation of errors, and (5) evaluation of errors. The researcher followed all of those steps in sequences in order to analyze students’ errors in descriptive texts.

The researcher classified the errors into three main categories. They are morphological, syntactical and other findings. This research also aimed to seek the SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students’ area of difficulties. As

(48)

stated by Corder (1974) as cited by Hendrickson (1981) that error analysis purpose is to provide feedback, the researcher only presented the result of this research to the teacher as feedback. Therefore, the researcher did not spent more time on teaching or fixing some ways of teaching, yet this research only required students’ worksheets of descriptive texts. The data from the student was examined and analyzed afterwards by the researcher without any intervention either from the teacher or the students.

B. Research Setting

This research was conducted in Sekolah Menengah Pertama Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta in the even semester of academic year 2012/ 2013 and to be specific, in April 20th, 2013. This school was selected to be the field of research because this school was proven as one of the best junior high schools in Yogyakarta. That fact was seen from the intelligence of the students. The researcher chose seventh grade students because seventh grade students had descriptive text in the odd semester of academic year 2012/ 2013.

C. Research Participants

The participants of this research were fifty students from three regular seventh grade classes of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta Yogyakarta. The researcher chose systematic sampling to define the objects of the research. The total of collected students’ descriptive texts was 110 worksheets. The researcher only took half of them using systematic sampling technique by Fraenkel and

(49)

35 Wallen (2009). The chosen students’ descriptive texts were 55 worksheets by 26 male students and 29 female students. The students’ level of competence was novice as stated by the teacher. In order to make sure, the researcher utilized a weighted descriptive texts rubric adapted from Brown (2007). The rubric is presented as follows:

Table 3.1. A Weighted Descriptive texts Rubric adapted from Brown (2007) Aspects Score Performance Description Weighting Content

(C) 30% -Topic - Details

4 The topic is complete and clear and the details are related to the topic.

3 The topic is complete and clear but the details are almost related to the topic.

2 The topic is complete and clear but the details are not related to the topic.

1 The topic is not clear and the details are not related to the topic. Organization (O) 20% -Identification - Description

4 Identification is complete and descriptions are arranged with proper connectives.

3 Identification is almost complete and descriptions are arranged with almost proper connectives.

2 Identification is not complete and descriptions are arranged with few misuses of connectives.

1 Identification is not complete and descriptions are arranged with misuse of connectives Grammar

(G) 20% - Use present

tense - Agreement

4 Very few grammatical or agreement inaccuracies

2X 3 Few grammatical or agreement

inaccuracies but not affect on meaning

2 Numerous grammatical or agreement inaccuracies

(50)

1 Frequent grammatical or agreement inaccuracies

Vocabulary (V) 15%

4 Effective choice of words and word forms

1.5 X 3 Few misuse of vocabularies,

word forms, but not change the meaning

2 Limited range confusing words and word form

1 Very poor knowledge of words, word forms, and not understandable Mechanics (M) 15% -Spelling -Punctuation -Capitalization

4 It uses correct spelling,

punctuations, and

capitalization

1.5X

3 It has occasional errors of spelling, punctuation and capitalization.

2 It has frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, and capitalization

1 It is dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, and capitalization.

Brown (2007) also stated the way to calculate the score from the rubric as follows:

Score: 3 (C) + 2 (O) + 2 (G) + 1.5 (V) + 1.5 (M) 40

From the rubric above, the students’ level of competence could be obtained and the result of assessing students’ descriptive through this rubric helped the researcher draw final conclusions of this research. Another reason why the researcher chose the seventh grade was that because the descriptive text was

(51)

37 taught in this grade. That fact was supported by the current Indonesia Educational Curriculum, Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Seventh grade is also a starting point for the students in junior high school. Their achievement in seventh might affect their achievement in their upcoming years. The researcher decided to take all the data from three regular seventh grade classes because the errors had been seen by the teacher in three seventh grade regular classes.

D. Research Instruments

In conducting this research, the researcher only used worksheets. The researcher applied error analysis to examine the errors found in the students’ descriptive texts. The instrument of this research was a material enrichment/ materi pengayaan for the students about descriptive texts. The researcher also considered the students’ descriptive texts as both objects of the study and research instruments.

The worksheets were distributed to all students of three seventh grade regular classes. After retrieving the worksheets, the students carried out the exercises. The researcher was also helped by the teacher in distributing the material. This exercise was designed to make the students recall their understanding of descriptive text. The researcher examined students’ worksheets using error analysis theories and some supporting theories such as source of errors, types of errors, causes of errors and Linguistic Category Taxonomy (Politzer and Ramirez, 1973). Svartvik (1973b) as cited by Ellis (1994) stated that

(52)

most error analyses use examination papers such as composition and etc. In this research, the researcher utilized students’ worksheets.

E. Data Gathering Technique

The first data collection was taken by giving a material enrichment to the students. This material enrichment was designed by the researcher for obtaining the primary data. This material enrichment would not affect the students’ marks. The material enrichment also helped the students recall what they have learnt in the previous semester. This material enrichment was also aimed by the teacher as a pre-lesson before the students carried on learning describing places. In this task, the students were required to write a descriptive text about people’s appearance and character. As the final sequence of data gathering, the researcher collected all the data: students’ worksheets. Afterwards, the researcher synthesized all the data in order to obtain a strong hypothesis using error analysis techniques on students’ descriptive texts.

F. Data Analysis Technique

This research was based on a linguistic description. The data analysis technique was based on linguistic category taxonomy by Politzer and Ramirez, (1973) as cited by Dulay, et al (1982). In linguistic category taxonomy, Politzer and Ramirez, (1973) presented two basic linguistic categories: morphology and syntax. The researcher also found other errors that could not be included in morphology and syntax. They are lexico-semantic errors and orthographic errors

(53)

39 by Keshavarz (2012) as cited by Abed (2012). Lexico-semantic and orthographic errors were, then, known as other findings as they were still essential for this study.

Before classifying the errors, the researcher searched all sentences that contained errors from 55 students’ worksheets. After searching the sentences containing errors, then, the error classification began. The sentences containing errors from the students’ material enrichment were examined with linguistic category taxonomy by by Politzer and Ramirez, (1973) as cited by Dulay, et al (1982). The data was taken once. The error which was made by the students was, then, categorized into some aspects based on the linguistic category taxonomy. The researcher also quantified the errors found in the students’ worksheets. The researcher needed to quantify the frequency of errors because the quantification of errors defined the errors and mistakes as stated by Ellis (1994). The quantity of errors also described the area of students’ difficulties. The quantified errors, then, were classified based on linguistic category taxonomy. The researcher classified the errors into some specific error types based on linguistic category taxonomy. The example of the error classification table is presented below.

Table 3.2. The Error Classification Table

Error Error Category Error

Sentences #

Syntax Morphology

Other

Findings Frequency

After classifying the errors, the researcher could analyze in which part they were facing the problem. Linguistic category taxonomy helps the researcher

(54)

pinpoint the errors found on students’ descriptive texts. The researcher also presented other findings besides morphological errors and syntax errors. Lexical errors described all errors that occurred in words. Lexical errors were divided into two categories. They are lexico-semantic and orthographic errors. Besides linguistic category taxonomy, the researcher also employed types of error by Dulay et al (1982) such as omission, addition, substitution and etc to clearly explain the errors in students’ descriptive texts.

G. Research Procedure

In research procedure, the researcher carried out this research in three main steps. They were research preparation, data gathering and data analysis. 1. Research Preparation

For the initial step of this research, the research came and met the headmaster of SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta. That meeting was arranged in the even semester of academic year 2012/2013. On that meeting, the research permission and the detail explanation of this research were delivered to the headmaster. The researcher continued the step of his research by getting an official letter from PBI and FKIP. That action was carried out after getting the headmaster’s approval. The researcher also discussed the plan of his research with the teacher. It helped the researcher to have a proper time arrangement for distributing worksheets. Therefore, the researcher could properly conduct his research in the arranged time. The researcher also delivered his research proposal and students’ worksheets to the headmaster and the teacher. The researcher

(55)

41 convinced the headmaster that this research would provide feedback for the teacher; therefore, the teacher could overcome the students’ error and attempt to minimize the frequency of errors.

2. Data Gathering

In data gathering, the researcher proposed to obtain the data from 55 students’ worksheets (three regular classes). The reason why the researcher obtained the data from three regular classes was to provide feedback for the teacher; therefore, the teacher could know what happened exactly in three regular classes. The data gathering was carried out on April 11th-20th, 2013of the even semester academic year 2012/ 2013. This data gathering was considered as a material enrichment of the descriptive text which had been taught in the first semester. The researcher gave the material enrichment to the teacher and the researcher gave the liberty for the teacher to assign this material enrichment as home work or class assignment. After the students were done with the material enrichment, then, the researcher compiled all the worksheets.

3. Data Analysis

In data analysis, the researcher combined all the data from students’ worksheets. The researcher compiled all of the students’ worksheets. Then, the researcher assessed the students’ worksheets using a weighted descriptive texts rubric adapted from Brown (2007). Besides assessing the students’ worksheets, the researcher also searched for sentences containing errors. The students’ worksheets were examined and assessed in order to find the errors in descriptive text. After assessing students’ worksheets and searching for error sentences, the

(1)

107

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

(2)

(3)

109

APPENDIX D

Letter of Permission

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

(4)

(5)

ABSTRACT

students’ sentences to three main categories: syntax errors, morphological errors,

and other findings. Each main category was also divided into some subcategories. The error categorization was based on Linguistic Category Taxonomy by Politzer and Ramirez as cited by Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982). To answer the second question, the researcher finished examining and categorizing students’ errors and afterward, the researcher concluded the possible causes of errors from the result of

students’ worksheets examination. There were five possible causes of errors based

on Norrish’s (1983).

Based on the result of this research, some conclusions were drawn. From the discussion on the first question, the researcher concluded that syntax errors are

the students’ area of difficulty. Syntax errors (63.18%) had the highest percentage

compared to morphological errors (19.81%) and other findings (17 %). Most of the found errors dealt with omission and addition. The possible causes of students’ errors were basic grammar understanding of the students,

overgeneralization, students’ carelessness, incomplete application of rules, and

first language interference. The suggestions for the teacher are to employ various techniques of teaching and to provide more exposure to grammar and English texts. The suggestions for the students are to grow students’ motivation and interest of English subject, to be aware of their English errors and to increases exposure of English texts.

Keywords: errors, descriptive texts, error analysis, Linguistic Category Taxonomy.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

(6)

vii

ABSTRAK

Pristantyo, Yustian. 2013. An Error Analysis on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta Seventh Grade Students’ Descriptive Texts. Yogyakarta: Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Kata Kunci: kekeliruan , teks deskriptif, analisa kekeliruan, Linguistic Category Taxonomy.

An error analysis on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students` descriptive texts.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

APPENDIX D

Letter of Permission

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

An Error analysis on students descriptive writing

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS OF ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMK MUHAMMADIYAH 2 SURAKARTA 2015/2016 ACADEMIC YEAR An Error Analysis on Descriptive Texts of Eleventh Grade Students at SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta 2015/2016 Academic Year.

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS OF ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMK MUHAMMADIYAH 2 SURAKARTA An Error Analysis on Descriptive Texts of Eleventh Grade Students at SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta 2015/2016 Academic Year.

ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS MADE BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMP N 2 COLOMADU Error Analysis Of Descriptive Texts Made By The Eighth Grade Students At SMP N 2 Colomadu In 2014/2015 Academic Year.

ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS MADE BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMP N 2 COLOMADU Error Analysis Of Descriptive Texts Made By The Eighth Grade Students At SMP N 2 Colomadu In 2014/2015 Academic Year.

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXT An Error Analysis On Descriptive Text Made By Eighth Grade Students Of SMP N 2 Banyudono In 2013/2014 Academic Year.

Error analysis on basic noun phrases in descriptive writing of VIIF students of SMP Pangudi Luhur 1 Yogyakarta.

An error analysis on the ninth year students` report texts of SMP N 2 Yogyakarta.

Error analysis on basic noun phrases in descriptive writing of VIIF students of SMP Pangudi Luhur 1 Yogyakarta - USD Repository

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON SMP PANGUDI LUHUR YOGYAKARTA SEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education

Dukungan

Links

An error analysis on SMP Pangudi Luhur Yogyakarta seventh grade students` descriptive texts.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

APPENDIX D

Letter of Permission

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

An Error analysis on students descriptive writing

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS OF ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMK MUHAMMADIYAH 2 SURAKARTA 2015/2016 ACADEMIC YEAR An Error Analysis on Descriptive Texts of Eleventh Grade Students at SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta 2015/2016 Academic Year.

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS OF ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMK MUHAMMADIYAH 2 SURAKARTA An Error Analysis on Descriptive Texts of Eleventh Grade Students at SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta 2015/2016 Academic Year.

ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS MADE BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMP N 2 COLOMADU Error Analysis Of Descriptive Texts Made By The Eighth Grade Students At SMP N 2 Colomadu In 2014/2015 Academic Year.

ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS MADE BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMP N 2 COLOMADU Error Analysis Of Descriptive Texts Made By The Eighth Grade Students At SMP N 2 Colomadu In 2014/2015 Academic Year.

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXT An Error Analysis On Descriptive Text Made By Eighth Grade Students Of SMP N 2 Banyudono In 2013/2014 Academic Year.

Error analysis on basic noun phrases in descriptive writing of VIIF students of SMP Pangudi Luhur 1 Yogyakarta.

An error analysis on the ninth year students` report texts of SMP N 2 Yogyakarta.

Error analysis on basic noun phrases in descriptive writing of VIIF students of SMP Pangudi Luhur 1 Yogyakarta - USD Repository

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON SMP PANGUDI LUHUR YOGYAKARTA SEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan