STUDENTS DIFFICULTIES IN ANALYZING EXPERIENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF ENGLISH TEXTS.
:Pmgrali:1 it! J!,1rtial
tiu; i)ewrf:-e
o~' '.1
,eJ
ENGLISH APPLffiD LIN'GUIST!CS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF IviEDAN
2009
A Thesis
STUDENTS' DIFFICULTIES IN ANALYZING
EXPERIENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF ENGLISH TEXTS
Muhammad Reza
Registration Number: 072188330034
E nglish Applied Linguistics Study Program
State University of Medan
This thesis was examined on July l5tb, 2009 by the Board of Examiners
Approved by
Adviser Commission
Adviser I
Approval
This Thesis was examined on 15th July 2009 by the Board of Examiners.
Board of Examinel'S
Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A., Ph.D.
Prof. Tina Mariany Arifin, M.A., Ph.D.
Prof. M. Silitonga, Ph.D.
Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M.Pd.
Dr. Busmin Guming, M.Pd.
Approved By
,.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The deepest gratitude is expressed to Allah SWf for all blessings before,
after and during the writing of this thesis dedicated to the writer's beloved mom,
the late Yasnetty, who had been inspiring him to keep on fighting for the life given
and fur those be loves.
A wholehearted thank you is reserved for Prof Amrin Saragih, M .A. ,
PaD., being the First Adviser and Prof. Tina Mariany Arifin, M.A. , Ph.D., being
the Second Adviser who stayed on top of everything and remained unflappable as
his advisers during the writing of this thesis. Expression of gratitude is extended
to the reviewers and examiners, namely Prof M . Sditonga, M.A., Ph.D., Prof Dr.
Lince Sihotnbing MPd, and Dr. Bnsmin Guming, MPd for the valuable input
and suggestions for the completion of the study.
The writer is truly indebted to all lecturers of the English Applied
Linguistics Study Program for the knowledge and valuable information he has had
during the study, to Zoel, the former administration staff and Siti Rohana, S. Pd.,
the new administration staff for their full assistance in the administration
procedures and a ll his mends Akmal, Titien, Maslatif, Bang Soleh, Bang Irsyad,
Bang Very, K.ak:: Lina, Salmah, Yanti, Wiki, Yo and Nani who have supported him.
A lot of assistance given by brother Kusnin was like water.in the dessert, thus the
writer thanks for the critic, support and any other contributions in planning,
implementing and writing this thesis.
The writer's special thanks go to D rs. Mapillndo, M:Pd., Dean ofTeacher
Training and Education Faculty of Asahan University, the Eng{lsh Department
students of FK1P UNA and the lecturers there who had been very helpful during
the research activities,
At last, the writer is vecy truly grateful for love, affections, supports and
patience ·f rom his brothers and sister Rony, Rini, Ihsan and Dedek, his beloved
father Syafril St Sinaro, his beloved wife, Novia Ardiany, and his little handsome
son, Hafizh Ahmad Al-AbroT, who can always keep the writer standing tall and
strong when they're beside him.
Medan, 6 June 2009
The Writer,
Muhammad Reza
Registration Number: 072188330034
ii
CRAYfERS
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5 ~ 1
CONCLUSIONS
Fmm the findings of the study, conclusions are drawn as the following.
1. Analyzing the experiential meaning of a text is the description of pmcesses
involved in the text. Thus, the way of analyzing the text should be based on the
process-ceDtered analysis so that the clauses could be separated from the rext
rorrectly and the clausal units could be labeled well
In separating the clauses from the texts. process which isreali.red by verb is not
the only focus, but the students should also pay attention to the role it plays in the
clause.
Labeling the process and other units should be on the basis of their meaning in
that clause which means that the analysis should .always be dependent on the
context where the clause or linguistic units work.
Since the students tended to mix up the concept of analysis in Functional
Grammar with another one, some more understanding on the basis concern of
systemic functiOnal linguistics analysis are needed by the students, namely
semantics or meaning system based-analysis which is dependent on the context
where the linguistic units are used.
5..2 SUGGESTIONS
In relation to the conclusions, suggestions are staged for the fuUowing.
L The Functional Grammar lecturers
a
The discussion about Functional Grammar should be more focused
on the students' needs, especially, about how this school of grammar
defines a language .fmm its own point of view.
52
53
b.
The stucknts' motivation in learning the concept of a clause in fimctional
.g rammar especially in the experiential functions of the text should be well
improved by the lecturas since the knowledge of transitivity will be very
helpful not only in analyzing the specific chatacteristic of linguistic
features in a genre but, in making up such kind of text in that kind of
genre.
c.
The lecturers should explain more clearly about the way fim.c tional
grammar analyzes the experiential fimctions of clauses (those in simple
sentence) as the direction and guide to draw the analysis and to avoid
over-generalization with any formal analyses.
There should be additional time allocation for Functional Grammar or any
subjects concerning with Functional Grammar at FKIP UNA Kisaran to
intensitY the students' understanding on the grammar analyses.
2. The students
a.
Tbe students should improve their understanding on how this
Functional Grammar defines a language :from its own point of view
by clearly distinguishing the way of Functional and Fonnal Grammar
in analyzing a language.
b. The students should learn more about Functional Grammar to
understand well the basic concept of Functional Grammar analysis
namely on the basis ofmeaning system.
3. Other Researchers
Other researches are in need of impiememation to explain any other
aspects in Functional Gmmmar since the
experiential functions of English texts.
study
focused only on the
54
REFERENCES
Alwasilah, A. Ch. 1985. Beberapa Madhab dan Dikotomi Teori Linguistik.
Bandung: Angkasa.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _. 1983. Linguistik Suatu Pengantar. Bandung: Angkasa.
Anderson, M. & Anderson, K. 1997. Text Types in English. South Yarra:
McMillan Education.
Ardiany, N. 2004. Etrot Analysis on Drawing Tree Diagram of English
Sentences Using Adjectival Modifiers. Unpublished Undergraduate
Thesis. Medan: FKIP UMSU.
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspect of the Theory of Syntax. theM. I. T. press.
Corder, S. P. 1982. Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford University
Press.
Creswell,
J. W. 1994. Research Design: Qualitative
& Quantitative Approach.
California: SAGE Publication, Inc.
. -=-----·
Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and
Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (3•d Ed). New
2008.
Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Downing, A & Locke, P. 2002. A University Course in English Grammar.
London & New York: Routledge.
Eggin, S. 1994. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London:
Pinter.
Gay, L. R. 2000. Education Research: Competences for Analysis and
Application. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Gerot, L. & Wignel, P. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sidney:
Gerd Stabler.
Green, J. 1972. Psycholinguistics, Chomsky and Psychology. England: Penguin
Books Ltd.
55
Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to functional Grammar (2nd Ed).
London: Edward Arnold
Hartman, R. R. K. & Stork, F. C. 1976. Dictionary of Language and Linguistics.
London: Applied Science Publishers, Ltd.
Ibrahim, A. S. 1987. Model Linguistik Dewasa Ini. Surabaya: Usaha Nasional.
Krohn, R. 1986. English Sentence Structure. The University of Michigan.
Krida, L. 1993. Kamus Linguistik. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Urnurn.
Matthews, P. H. 1981. Syntax. Great Britain: Cambrid ge University Press.
Parera, J. D. 1991. Sintaksis 2. Jakarta: Grarnedia Pustaka Urnurn.
Parrot, M. 2000. Grammar for English Language Teachers. Cambridge
University Press.
Poerwadarrninta, W. J. S. 1976. Kamus Umum Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: PN
Balai Pustaka.
Saragih, A. 2004. Functional Grammar, Unpublished Lectur-irtg Material.
Medan: UNIMED.
2006, Discourse Analysis. Unpublished Lecturing Material.
Me
tiu; i)ewrf:-e
o~' '.1
,eJ
ENGLISH APPLffiD LIN'GUIST!CS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF IviEDAN
2009
A Thesis
STUDENTS' DIFFICULTIES IN ANALYZING
EXPERIENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF ENGLISH TEXTS
Muhammad Reza
Registration Number: 072188330034
E nglish Applied Linguistics Study Program
State University of Medan
This thesis was examined on July l5tb, 2009 by the Board of Examiners
Approved by
Adviser Commission
Adviser I
Approval
This Thesis was examined on 15th July 2009 by the Board of Examiners.
Board of Examinel'S
Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A., Ph.D.
Prof. Tina Mariany Arifin, M.A., Ph.D.
Prof. M. Silitonga, Ph.D.
Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M.Pd.
Dr. Busmin Guming, M.Pd.
Approved By
,.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The deepest gratitude is expressed to Allah SWf for all blessings before,
after and during the writing of this thesis dedicated to the writer's beloved mom,
the late Yasnetty, who had been inspiring him to keep on fighting for the life given
and fur those be loves.
A wholehearted thank you is reserved for Prof Amrin Saragih, M .A. ,
PaD., being the First Adviser and Prof. Tina Mariany Arifin, M.A. , Ph.D., being
the Second Adviser who stayed on top of everything and remained unflappable as
his advisers during the writing of this thesis. Expression of gratitude is extended
to the reviewers and examiners, namely Prof M . Sditonga, M.A., Ph.D., Prof Dr.
Lince Sihotnbing MPd, and Dr. Bnsmin Guming, MPd for the valuable input
and suggestions for the completion of the study.
The writer is truly indebted to all lecturers of the English Applied
Linguistics Study Program for the knowledge and valuable information he has had
during the study, to Zoel, the former administration staff and Siti Rohana, S. Pd.,
the new administration staff for their full assistance in the administration
procedures and a ll his mends Akmal, Titien, Maslatif, Bang Soleh, Bang Irsyad,
Bang Very, K.ak:: Lina, Salmah, Yanti, Wiki, Yo and Nani who have supported him.
A lot of assistance given by brother Kusnin was like water.in the dessert, thus the
writer thanks for the critic, support and any other contributions in planning,
implementing and writing this thesis.
The writer's special thanks go to D rs. Mapillndo, M:Pd., Dean ofTeacher
Training and Education Faculty of Asahan University, the Eng{lsh Department
students of FK1P UNA and the lecturers there who had been very helpful during
the research activities,
At last, the writer is vecy truly grateful for love, affections, supports and
patience ·f rom his brothers and sister Rony, Rini, Ihsan and Dedek, his beloved
father Syafril St Sinaro, his beloved wife, Novia Ardiany, and his little handsome
son, Hafizh Ahmad Al-AbroT, who can always keep the writer standing tall and
strong when they're beside him.
Medan, 6 June 2009
The Writer,
Muhammad Reza
Registration Number: 072188330034
ii
CRAYfERS
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5 ~ 1
CONCLUSIONS
Fmm the findings of the study, conclusions are drawn as the following.
1. Analyzing the experiential meaning of a text is the description of pmcesses
involved in the text. Thus, the way of analyzing the text should be based on the
process-ceDtered analysis so that the clauses could be separated from the rext
rorrectly and the clausal units could be labeled well
In separating the clauses from the texts. process which isreali.red by verb is not
the only focus, but the students should also pay attention to the role it plays in the
clause.
Labeling the process and other units should be on the basis of their meaning in
that clause which means that the analysis should .always be dependent on the
context where the clause or linguistic units work.
Since the students tended to mix up the concept of analysis in Functional
Grammar with another one, some more understanding on the basis concern of
systemic functiOnal linguistics analysis are needed by the students, namely
semantics or meaning system based-analysis which is dependent on the context
where the linguistic units are used.
5..2 SUGGESTIONS
In relation to the conclusions, suggestions are staged for the fuUowing.
L The Functional Grammar lecturers
a
The discussion about Functional Grammar should be more focused
on the students' needs, especially, about how this school of grammar
defines a language .fmm its own point of view.
52
53
b.
The stucknts' motivation in learning the concept of a clause in fimctional
.g rammar especially in the experiential functions of the text should be well
improved by the lecturas since the knowledge of transitivity will be very
helpful not only in analyzing the specific chatacteristic of linguistic
features in a genre but, in making up such kind of text in that kind of
genre.
c.
The lecturers should explain more clearly about the way fim.c tional
grammar analyzes the experiential fimctions of clauses (those in simple
sentence) as the direction and guide to draw the analysis and to avoid
over-generalization with any formal analyses.
There should be additional time allocation for Functional Grammar or any
subjects concerning with Functional Grammar at FKIP UNA Kisaran to
intensitY the students' understanding on the grammar analyses.
2. The students
a.
Tbe students should improve their understanding on how this
Functional Grammar defines a language :from its own point of view
by clearly distinguishing the way of Functional and Fonnal Grammar
in analyzing a language.
b. The students should learn more about Functional Grammar to
understand well the basic concept of Functional Grammar analysis
namely on the basis ofmeaning system.
3. Other Researchers
Other researches are in need of impiememation to explain any other
aspects in Functional Gmmmar since the
experiential functions of English texts.
study
focused only on the
54
REFERENCES
Alwasilah, A. Ch. 1985. Beberapa Madhab dan Dikotomi Teori Linguistik.
Bandung: Angkasa.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _. 1983. Linguistik Suatu Pengantar. Bandung: Angkasa.
Anderson, M. & Anderson, K. 1997. Text Types in English. South Yarra:
McMillan Education.
Ardiany, N. 2004. Etrot Analysis on Drawing Tree Diagram of English
Sentences Using Adjectival Modifiers. Unpublished Undergraduate
Thesis. Medan: FKIP UMSU.
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspect of the Theory of Syntax. theM. I. T. press.
Corder, S. P. 1982. Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford University
Press.
Creswell,
J. W. 1994. Research Design: Qualitative
& Quantitative Approach.
California: SAGE Publication, Inc.
. -=-----·
Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and
Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (3•d Ed). New
2008.
Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Downing, A & Locke, P. 2002. A University Course in English Grammar.
London & New York: Routledge.
Eggin, S. 1994. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London:
Pinter.
Gay, L. R. 2000. Education Research: Competences for Analysis and
Application. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Gerot, L. & Wignel, P. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sidney:
Gerd Stabler.
Green, J. 1972. Psycholinguistics, Chomsky and Psychology. England: Penguin
Books Ltd.
55
Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to functional Grammar (2nd Ed).
London: Edward Arnold
Hartman, R. R. K. & Stork, F. C. 1976. Dictionary of Language and Linguistics.
London: Applied Science Publishers, Ltd.
Ibrahim, A. S. 1987. Model Linguistik Dewasa Ini. Surabaya: Usaha Nasional.
Krohn, R. 1986. English Sentence Structure. The University of Michigan.
Krida, L. 1993. Kamus Linguistik. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Urnurn.
Matthews, P. H. 1981. Syntax. Great Britain: Cambrid ge University Press.
Parera, J. D. 1991. Sintaksis 2. Jakarta: Grarnedia Pustaka Urnurn.
Parrot, M. 2000. Grammar for English Language Teachers. Cambridge
University Press.
Poerwadarrninta, W. J. S. 1976. Kamus Umum Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: PN
Balai Pustaka.
Saragih, A. 2004. Functional Grammar, Unpublished Lectur-irtg Material.
Medan: UNIMED.
2006, Discourse Analysis. Unpublished Lecturing Material.
Me