Errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of English Languange Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.

(1)

vi ABSTRACT

Martaningrum, Francisca Yulia. (2012). Errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Direct-indirect speech is one of the topics learned in Structure Class of English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) of Sanata Dharma University. Students of ELESP often have difficulties in transferring direct speech into indirect speech because they need to make changes in some elements, like in tenses, pronouns, and adverbs of time. Besides, there are some rules and exceptions in transferring direct speech into indirect speech. Those cases make the students make errors in forming indirect speech. On the other hand, indirect speech mastery is important for them as teacher candidates because they need to be a good model for their students.

This research explored the errors made by the fourth semester students of ELESP in forming indirect speech. It focused on two research problems: (1) What kinds of errors do the fourth semester students of ELESP make in forming indirect speech? and (2) What are the possible causes of the students’ errors? In order to answer the first research question, a survey with a test as the instrument was used as the method. While, a library study was used in order to answer the second research question. The participants of this research were the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. The research was conducted in two Structure IV Classes of 2011/2012 academic year.

It was found that 40% of the students’ answers in the test was erroneous. It indicated that many students still made errors in forming indirect speech, which were in the tenses, pronouns, adverbs, demonstratives, word order, and conjunctions. The errors were also analyzed using surface structure taxonomy (Dulay et al., 1982) and it was shown that the errors could be categorized into addition errors, omission errors, misformation errors, and misordering errors. The possible causes of errors were analyzed using Brown’s theory about sources of errors (2000). The result showed that only interlingual transfer and intralingual transfer were applicable in this research. Context of learning and communication strategies were not applicable because the students’ process of learning and the way they communicate did not be explored. It was concluded that the errors which were not caused by interlingual transfer or intralingual transfer were mostly caused by students’ unawareness toward the context of the sentences.

The conclusion was that the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University still made errors in forming indirect speech. Due to the results, it was suggested that the Structure Class lecturers should apply a suitable method of teaching, give more practices and pay more attention to students’ understanding. While, the students should pay more attention to the lecturer’s explanation and have more practices. This research can also be explored and modified by other researchers by changing the subject, methods, or instruments. Keywords: error, error analysis, indirect speech, direct speech

(2)

vii ABSTRAK

Kalimat langsung dan tidak langsung adalah salah satu topik yang dipelajari di kelas Structure Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (PBI) di Universitas Sanata Dharma. Mahasiswa Program Studi PBI seringkali mengalami kesulitan dalam mengubah kalimat langsung menjadi kalimat tidak langsung karena mereka perlu mengubah beberapa elemen, seperti tenses, kata ganti, dan keterangan waktu. Di samping itu, ada beberapa aturan dan pengecualian dalam mengubah kalimat langsung menjadi kalimat tidak langsung. Hal ini menyebabkan mahasiswa masih sering membuat kesalahan dalam membentuk kalimat tidak langsung. Di sisi lain, penguasaan terhadap pembentukan kalimat tidak langsung sangat penting bagi mereka sebagai calon guru karena mereka perlu menjadi model yang baik bagi para siswa.

Penelitian ini meneliti kesalahan yang dibuat oleh mahasiswa semester empat Program Studi PBI dalam membentuk kalimat tidak langsung dengan menjawab dua pertanyaan: (1) Kesalahan macam apa yang dibuat oleh mahasiswa semester empat Program Studi PBI dalam membentuk kalimat tidak langsung? dan (2) Hal-hal apa saja yang mungkin menyebabkan mahasiswa membuat kesalahan? Untuk menjawab pertanyaan pertama, digunakan survey sebagai metode penelitian. Peneliti menyusun tes sebagai instrumen. Sedangkan, untuk menjawab pertanyaan kedua, digunakan studi pustaka. Partisipan dalam penelitian ini adalah mahasiswa semester empat Program Studi PBI di Universitas Sanata Dharma. Penelitian diadakan di dua kelas Structure IV tahun akademik 2011/2012.

Ditemukan bahwa lebih kurang 40% jawaban mahasiswa masih mengandung kesalahan. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa banyak mahasiswa masih membuat kesalahan dalam membentuk kalimat tidak langsung, yang terdiri dari: kesalahan dalam tenses, kata ganti, kata keterangan, kata penunjuk, urutan kata, dan kata hubung. Kesalahan-kesalahan juga dianalisa menggunakan surface structure taxonomy (Dulay et al., 1982), dan hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa kesalahan kesalahan tersebut dapat dikategorikan menjadi kesalahan dalam bentuk addition, omission, misformation, dan misordering. Hal-hal yang mungkin menyebabkan kesalahan dianalisis menggunakan teori Brown tentang penyebab terjadinya kesalahan (2000). Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa hanya interlingual transfer dan intralingual transfer yang dapat diterapkan. Konteks pembelajaran dan strategi komunikasi tidak dapat diaplikasikan karena peneliti tidak meneliti lebih jauh tentang proses pembelajaran mahasiswa dan cara mahasiswa berkomunikasi. Penyebab kesalahan yang tidak termasuk dalam teori Brown kemudian dikategorikan dalam penyebab kesalahan lain. Dari analisis yang dilakukan, kesalahan yang tidak disebabkan oleh interlingual transfer maupun intralingual transfer paling banyak disebabkan oleh ketidakpedulian mahasiswa terhadap konteks kalimat.

(3)

viii

Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah bahwa mahasiswa semester empat Program Studi PBI Universitas Sanata Dharma masih membuat kesalahan dalam membentuk kalimat tidak langsung. Mengacu kepada hasil penelitian tersebut, disarankan bahwa para dosen sebaiknya menerapkan metode mengajar yang lebih sesuai, memberikan lebih banyak latihan, dan lebih memperhatikan pemahaman siswa terhadap topik yang diajarkan. Sedangkan, mahasiswa sendiri sebaiknya memperhatikan penjelasan dosen dan mengerjakan lebih banyak latihan. Peneliti lain dapat melakukan penelitian lebih lanjut atau memodifikasi penelitian dengan cara mengubah subjek, metode, atau instrument penelitian.

Kata kunci: kesalahan, analisis kesalahan, kalimat tidak langsung, kalimat tidak langsung

(4)

ERRORS

AMONG

OF ENGLISH LA

OF SA

Presented to O

ENGLISH LA DEPARTMEN FACULTY O

RORS IN FORMING INDIRECT SPEEC

ONG THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDEN

SH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY P

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

ASARJANA PENDIDIKANTHESIS

sented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requiremen to Obtain theSarjana PendidikanDegree

in English Language Education

Francisca Yulia Martaningrum Student Number: 081214069

ISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROG TMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCA TY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCA

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

2012

SPEECH

STUDENTS

DY PROGRAM

SITY

ements

ROGRAM UCATION UCATION

(5)

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

ERRORS

IN FORMING INDIRECT SPEECII

AMONG THE

FOT]RTTI

SEMESTER STUDENTS

OF ENGLISH

LATTGUAGE

EDUCATION

STUDY

PROGRAM

OF SANATA DIIARMA

T]NTVERSITY

Approved by

October2012

ffe

T-#"ro

4f}"i"uLJ1u

Manar

$'st"@r:

A

ffryr.84*4\

,&

_'i#,{

!f

-*b

L**a""g*

(6)

ERRORS

IN FORMING INDIRECT

SPEECH

AMONG THE

FOTJRTH

SEMESTER STUDENTS

OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION

STUDY

PROGRAM

OF SANATA DHARMA

UNIVERSITY

Chairperson Secretary Member Member Member

FRANCISCA YULIA MARTANINGRUM Student Number: 08121 4069

Defended before the Board of Examiners on 6 November 2Al2

and Declared Acceptable

Board of Examiners: C. Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd. Drs. Barli Bram, M.Ed., Ph.D. Made Frida Yulia S.Pd., M.Pd. Drs. Barli Bram, M.Ed., Ph.D. G. Punto Aji, S.Pd., M.Hum.

Yogyakarta" 6 November 2Al2

Faculty of Teachers Training and Education Sanata Dharma University

(7)

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, 6 November 2012

The Writer

l/

/v/

/

Francisca

Yulia

Martaningrum 081214069

**'*1,* lv

(8)

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAII

PUBLIKASI KARYA

ILMIAH

UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS

Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:

Nama

: Francisca Yulia Martaningrum

Nomor

Mahasiswa : 081214069

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

ERRORS IN F'ORMING INDIRECT SPEECH AMONG THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDf,NTS

OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVfi,RSITY

Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk pengkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya

di Internet atau media

lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu

ijin dari saya maupun

memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.

Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenamya. Dibuat di Yogyakarta

Pada tanggal: 10 Desember 2012

Yang menyatakan

It

'/

/(M

(9)

ABSTRACT

(10)

vii ABSTRAK

Ditemukan bahwa lebih kurang 40% jawaban mahasiswa masih mengandung kesalahan. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa banyak mahasiswa masih membuat kesalahan dalam membentuk kalimat tidak langsung, yang terdiri dari: kesalahan dalam tenses, kata ganti, kata keterangan, kata penunjuk, urutan kata, dan kata hubung. Kesalahan-kesalahan juga dianalisa menggunakan surface structure taxonomy (Dulay et al., 1982), dan hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa kesalahan kesalahan tersebut dapat dikategorikan menjadi kesalahan dalam bentuk addition, omission, misformation, dan misordering. Hal-hal yang mungkin menyebabkan kesalahan dianalisis menggunakan teori Brown tentang penyebab terjadinya kesalahan (2000). Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa hanya interlingual transfer dan intralingual transfer yang dapat diterapkan. Konteks pembelajaran dan strategi komunikasi tidak dapat diaplikasikan karena peneliti tidak meneliti lebih jauh tentang proses pembelajaran mahasiswa dan cara mahasiswa berkomunikasi. Penyebab kesalahan yang tidak termasuk dalam teori Brown kemudian dikategorikan dalam penyebab kesalahan lain. Dari analisis yang dilakukan, kesalahan yang tidak disebabkan oleh interlingual transfer maupun intralingual transfer paling banyak disebabkan oleh ketidakpedulian mahasiswa terhadap konteks kalimat.

(11)

viii

Kata kunci: kesalahan, analisis kesalahan, kalimat tidak langsung, kalimat tidak langsung

(12)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First, I would like to express my deepest and greatest gratitude to God for everything He has given to me. His blessings and love always strengthen me to face every difficulty in finishing this thesis.

My biggest and deepest appreciation is dedicated to my advisor, Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd., for her time and willingness to read and check my thesis. Her advices, criticisms, and suggestions are very precious for me to finish this thesis. I also thank her for the patience in listening to me and guiding me during this process.

I also want to present my biggest appreciation to Drs. Barli Bram, M.Ed., Ph.D., Carla Sih Prabandari, S.Pd., M.Hum., and Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd. for their permission to conduct the tests in their Structure IV Classes. Besides, I would like to thank the students of Class B, Class C, and Class D of Structure IV classes of 2011/2012 academic year for being great and cooperative participants for this research.

I would like to dedicate my deepest love and appreciation to my beloved parents, Antonius Djarwoko and Sri Sudaryanti, for their love, patience, support, encouragement, understanding, and prayers. My deepest love and appreciations are also presented to my brothers and my sister, Mas Ari, Mbak Tari, Mas Heru, and Wahyu, for their encouragement to finish my study. I thank them for their support, advices, and prayers. They are the reason for me to keep struggling.

My special thanks are for my beloved friend, Adit, who always supports me in every situation. He always strengthens me whenever I lost my confidence.

(13)

My sincere gratitude goes to my friends: Paul, Nora, Deby, Vita, Ratna, Ivon, Ika, and Tania, for the support and encouragement. I also thank them for our precious and unforgettable moments during our days in this university. The appreciation also goes to my Service Program Design group members: Deby, Yosi, Nieza, Aji, and Purwo. I thank them for our togetherness during these last two semesters. Additionally, the greatest gratitude is also presented to all my friends in Kost Diva, who always help me whenever I have difficulties.

Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to those whose names I cannot mention here one by one. God bless them all.

(14)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE ………... i

APPROVAL PAGES ………... ii

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ……… iv

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI……… v

ABSTRACT ………. vi

ABSTRAK………. vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………. ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS ………. xi

LIST OF TABLES ………... xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES ……….. xv

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ………. 1

A. Background of the Study ………... 1

B. Research Problem ………... 4

C. Problem Limitation ………... 4

D. Objectives of the Study ……… 5

E. Benefits of the Study ……….... 5

(15)

xii

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ……… 8

A. Theoretical Description ……… 8

1. Error Analysis ………... 8

2. Indirect Speech ………... 14

B. Theoretical Framework ……… 21

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ……….. 25

A. Research Method ………. 25

B. Research Setting ………... 26

C. Research Participants ……… 26

D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique ………. 27

1. Validity ……….... 28

2. Test Reliability ………. 30

E. Data Analysis Technique ……….. 32

F. Research Procedure ……….. 32

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION...……… 35

A. Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Speech ……... 35

1. Errors in Indirect Statements ………... 36

2. Errors in Indirect WH-Questions ………. 39

3. Errors in Indirect Yes-No Questions ……… 43

(16)

xiii

5. Errors in Indirect Exclamations ………... 49 B. The Possible Causes of Errors ………. 51

1. Interlingual Transfer as the Possible Cause of

Errors………. 52

2. Intralingual Transfer as the Possible Cause of

Errors………. 54

3. Other Sources of Errors ……….. 55

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ….. 58

A. Conclusions ……….. 58

B. Recommendations ……… 62

1. Recommendations for the Structure Class

Lecturers of ELESP ……… 62

2. Recommendations for the Students of ELESP … 63 3. Recommendations for Other Researchers ……… 63

REFERENCES ………. 65

(17)

xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1 Factors Affecting Sample of Analysis (Ellis and Barkhuizen, 2005: 58)……… 2.2 The Examples of Backshift (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 689) ………...

15 2.3 Shifts in Adverbial Time (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999:

697) ………. 17

2.4 Backshifts in Tenses …….………... 24 2.5 Shifts in Different Types of Indirect Speech ………... 24 3.1 Test Items Distribution based on the Basic Types of Indirect Speech … 29 3.2 Crude Criterion for the Evaluation of a Coefficient (Best, 1983: 255) ... 31 4.1 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Statements ……….. 36 4.2 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect WH-Questions …... 40 4.3 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Yes-No Questions... 43 4.4 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Commands ………. 46 4.5 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Exclamations ……. 49

(18)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 The Permission Letters ………... 68

Appendix 2 The Test ……..………..……….. 69

Appendix 3 The Answer Key ………. 72

Appendix 4 The Students’ Answer Sheets ………. 73

Appendix 5 The Errors Found in Students’ Answers ……….... 77

Appendix 6 The Students’ Scores and the Reliability of the Test for Class B ………..…….. 81

Appendix 7 The Students’ Scores and the Reliability of the Test for Class D ………..….. 83

(19)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter is divided into six parts. They are background of the study, problem formulation, problem limitation, objectives of the study, benefits of the study, and definition of terms.

A. Background of the Study

Nunan (2003) states “Sentences are acceptable if they follow the rules set out by the grammar of the language” (p. 154). Grammar itself, according to Richards, Platt, and Weber as cited by Nunan (2003), is defined as “A description of the structure of a language and the way in which units such as words and phrases are combined to produce sentences in the language” (p. 154). Those statements indicate that grammar is one aspect that should be mastered by language learners in order to make acceptable sentences. A sentence is acceptable when it uses combination of words or phrases that are grammatically correct. When someone is able to make an acceptable sentence, s/he is able to communicate or deliver messages to others effectively.

In communicating with others, both in written and oral communication, a speaker sometimes needs to deliver a different person’s message to other people. For example, when David tells Kevin that he is going to go to the beach, he will say, “I’m going to go to the beach tomorrow.” The sentence uttered by Kevin is called direct speech. The speech is different when Kevin told what David had said

(20)

to him to another friend in different time and situation by using indirect speech. Using indirect speech, Kevin will say the sentence as David said that he was going to go to the beach the next day.

From the illustration, it is shown that when a speaker uses indirect speech to deliver someone’s message to others, s/he needs to make changes in some aspects, like in tenses, pronouns, and adverbs of time. There are some rules and exceptions in transferring direct speech into indirect speech, like when the direct speech is a general truth, it does not need any changes. It makes students find difficulties in transferring direct speech into indirect speech.

Mastering indirect speech is important in some ways. First, indirect speech is often used in daily communication. Communication will be successful when a speaker is able to deliver a message, including others’ message to the object of speaking. If a speaker cannot transfer direct speech into indirect speech, there will be misunderstanding, which means that the communication is not successful. Second, English learners often find the use of indirect speech in some genre of text, like narrative text, recount text, and news item. They should be able to read and write those kinds of genre. If students cannot understand what is meant in an indirect speech, their understanding of the text they read is not complete because misunderstanding still exists. In writing, they are also demanded to be able to write indirect speech from a direct speech in order to avoid the readers’ misunderstanding.

Considering the importance of indirect speech, an error analysis in changing direct speech into indirect speech among the fourth semester students of

(21)

English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) of Sanata Dharma University is conducted. Fourth semester students are chosen because it is considered that they had learned about indirect speech in the third semester. Besides, based on the researcher’s experience and observation, the fourth semester students were still confused and tended to make some errors in changing direct speech into indirect speech although they had learned about it in the previous semester.

One example is found when some students tried to change the direct speech “Can I borrow your book?” The form of the indirect speech of the sentence should be “My sister said if she could borrow my book” However, some students changed it into “My sister said can I borrow your book.” This case shows that in forming indirect speech, some students of ELESP still make errors in some aspects, like conjunction, tenses, and pronoun, which make the sentences they formed not grammatically correct.

The purpose of this research is to find what kinds of errors in forming indirect speech are still made by the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University and what the possible causes of the errors are. The result of this research is expected to give more data about the kinds of errors and the possible causes of the errors made by the students. Therefore, it is expected that this research will come up with the suggestion on which part the lecturers and the students of ELESP should pay attention more when they are learning about indirect speech.

(22)

B. Research Problem

The problems of the research are stated in two questions:

1. What kinds of errors do the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University make in forming indirect speech?

2. What are the possible causes of the students’ errors?

C. Problem Limitation

Indirect speech can be used both in oral form and in written form. This research only focuses on the errors made by the students in written form of indirect speech. It means that a survey research by using test as the instrument will be conducted. The form of the test is written test. It is considered more efficient than oral test which demands the researcher to conduct the test for each student.

Knowing that there are various types of indirect speech, the students’ errors in some types of sentences will be analyzed. The types are indirect speech in the form of statements, questions (WH-questions and yes-no questions), commands, and exclamations. Those fields are chosen based on the reason that the fourth semester students have learned and they have to master those types of indirect speech.

The fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program are chosen because it is considered that they had learned indirect speech in their previous Structure Class, especially in Structure III Class. Thus, it can be analyzed whether they still make errors in forming indirect speech after they learned it before. By knowing what errors they often make, both the Structure

(23)

Class lecturers and the fourth semester students will be able to learn from the errors they made.

There will be a test to find the students errors. The test takers will be students of Structure IV classes of 2011/2012 academic year. This limitation is based on the consideration that students who are taking Structure IV class are the students who had passed Structure III Class, where they had learned about indirect speech. Shoppers or the students who retake the course are not included in the test since they are assumed to have different level of grammar mastery compared to the fourth semester students.

D. Objectives of the Study

The research is intended to achieve two main objectives. They are:

1. To find out what kinds of errors in forming indirect speech made by the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.

2. To find out the possible causes of the students’ errors.

E. Benefits of the Study

The findings of the research are expected to give benefits to the Structure Class lecturers and the students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.

1. Structure Class Lecturers of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University

This research gives information to the Structure Classes lecturers about the errors made by the students in forming indirect speech. By reading this research, it

(24)

is expected that Structure Class lecturers will be able to improve their teaching in indirect speech, especially in the part where the students still make errors.

2. Students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University

For the students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University, the expectation is that this research can improve their learning in indirect speech. By knowing the common errors in indirect speech, they will find information about the part they should give more attention when they are learning indirect speech in order to avoid the errors. Furthermore, it is expected that students can enrich their knowledge about indirect speech by reading this research since this research discusses some theories of indirect speech.

F. Definition of Terms

This part discusses some terms that are used in this research. They are indirect speech, error, and the fourth semester students of ELESP.

1. Indirect Speech

Azar (1993: 275) states indirect speech or reported speech “…refers to using a noun clause to report what someone has said.” This research focuses on errors made by the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University in forming indirect speech. Since indirect speech can be produced in oral form and written form, it is specified that indirect speech in this research is the written form of indirect speech.

(25)

2. Error

Norrish (1983) states error is a “systematic deviation, when a learner has not learnt something and consistently gets it wrong” (p. 7). He mentions that error is different from mistake. Error happens consistently, while mistake happens inconsistently. According to Chomsky, as cited by Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982), errors are categorized into two types. The first type is called performance error, which is caused by some factors like fatigue or carelessness. The second type is competence error, which is caused by lack of knowledge. Corder (1967), as cited by Dulay et al., states performance error is called mistake, while competence error is called error.

In this research, Chomsky’s definition of error in which all deviations or wrong forms produced by the students are categorized as errors is adopted. It means that there is no differentiation between errors and mistakes. It is based on the reason that the test is only conducted once. Therefore, it is impossible to check whether the errors happen consistently or not.

3. The Fourth Semester Students of ELESP

This research is conducted to find out errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. Fourth semester students are students who are in the fourth semester of university. In this case, the fourth semester students are those who entered the university in 2010/2011 academic year. It means that they are in the second years of their study in ELESP. In the fourth semester, most of the students take Structure IV class, which is the continuation of Structure I, II, and III classes.

(26)

8 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter deals with related literature. It consists of two parts: theoretical description and theoretical framework. Theoretical description deals with the theories relevant to this research. Meanwhile, theoretical framework deals with the relation between the research matters and the theories.

A. Theoretical Description

This research is conducted to find errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of ELESP at Sanata Dharma University and the possible causes of the errors. Thus, in this part, the researcher discusses related theories about error analysis and indirect speech.

1. Error Analysis

“Error Analysis (EA) consists of a set of procedures for identifying, describing and explaining learners’ errors.” (Ellis and Barkhuizen, 2005: 51). Norrish (1983) explains that an EA can be used to find students’ difficulty in mastering a material. By using EA, teachers can objectively assess how their teaching gives contribution to students. According to Corder (1974), as stated by Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005: 57), there are some steps in conducting error analysis. They are collecting a sample of learner language, identifying errors, describing errors, explaining errors, and evaluating errors.

(27)

a. Collection of a Sample of Learner Language

The function of this step is to provide the data for EA. In this step, determining the factors that may affect the sample of the analysis is needed. The factors which need to be determined are shown in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: Factors Affecting Sample of Analysis (Ellis and Barkhuizen, 2005: 58)

Factors Description

A. Learner

1. Proficiency level 2. Other languages 3. Language learning

background

Elementary, intermediate, or advanced The learners’ L1, other L2s

Instructed, naturalistic, mixed B. Language

1) Medium 2) Genre 3) Content

Oral or written

Conversation, narrative, essay, etc The topic of the discourse

C. Production 1) Unplanned 2) Planned

The discourse is produced spontaneously The discourse is produced after planning or under condition that allow for careful online planning.

b. Identification of Errors

Identification of errors is a process in which the learners’ production and what native speakers in the same level will produce are compared in the same context. The procedures in identifying errors according to Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) are:

1) Preparing reconstruction of the sample as the native speaker in the same level would produce.

2) Assuming that every sentence produced by the learners is erroneous and eliminating those which are well formed.

(28)

3) Identifying the difference between what learners produced with the reconstructed version.

c. Description of Errors

This step deals with the identification of how the forms produced by the learners are different from the forms produced by native speakers in the same level. There are two steps in describing errors according to Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005), which are describing the categories for coding the errors which have been identified and documenting the frequency of the errors in each category.

According to James (1998), as cited by Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005), in categorizing errors, two kinds of taxonomy can be used. They are linguistic taxonomy and surface structure taxonomy. In linguistic taxonomy, errors can be categorized based on the descriptive grammar of the target language. Meanwhile, according to Dulay, Burt, and Krashen as cited by Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005: 61), errors in surface structure taxonomy are divided into four categories. They are omission, addition, misformation, and misordering.

1) Omission

Dulay et al. (1982: 154) state “Omission errors are characterized by the absence of an item that must appear in a well-formed utterance.” The example is shown in the omission of some words in Mary president new company which should beMary is the president of the new company.

2) Addition

According to Dulay et al. (1982: 156), the character of addition errors is the existence of an item that should not exist in a well-formed utterance, for

(29)

example is the addition of –ed in the past form of the word eat instead of using ate, so that the word becomeseated.

3) Misformation

“Misformation errors are characterized by the use of wrong form of the morpheme or structure” (Dulay et al., 1982: 158). Different from omission, in which the item does not exist at all, in misformation errors, the item exists but it is in incorrect form. The example is shown on the use ofmeas both a subject and an object pronoun and the use of don’t + verb1 and no + verb1 (Ellis and Barkhuizen, 2005: 61).

4) Misordering

Dulay et al. (1982: 162) state “Misordering errors are characterized by the incorrect placement of a morpheme or group of morphemes in an utterance.” The example is the misplacement of the wordison the sentenceI do not know what is it, whichshould beI do not know what it is.

d. Explanation of Errors

Explaining errors, which is the most important step in EA, means finding out the sources of errors to find why the errors are made. In this step, it is necessary to be able to differentiate between errors and mistakes. Norrish (1983) states error is a “systematic deviation, when a learner has not learnt something and consistently ‘gets it wrong’” (p. 7). He mentions that error is different from mistake. Error happens consistently, while mistake happens inconsistently.

(30)

According to Chomsky, as cited by Dulay et al. (1982), errors are categorized into two types. The first type is error that is caused by some factors like fatigue or carelessness. This kind of error is called performance error. The second type is competence error, which is caused by lack of knowledge. Corder (1967), as cited by Dulay et al., states performance error is called mistake, while competence error is called error.

Brown (2000) mentions there are four possible sources of errors. They are interlingual transfer, intralingual transfer, context of learning, and communication strategies.

1) Interlingual Transfer

“Interlingual transfer is a significant source of error for all learners. The beginning stages of learning a second language are especially vulnerable to interlingual transfer from the native language or interference” (Brown, 2000: 224). According to Brown (2000), interlingual transfer, or called interference, is “the interfering effects of the native language on the target (the second) language (p. 95).”

2) Intralingual Transfer

According to Jaszczolt (1995) and Taylor (1975) as cited by Brown (2000: 224), interference or interlingual transfer often dominates the early phase of language learning. On the other hand, when the learners start to purchase parts of a new system, intralingual transfer or generalization within the target language, will happen. Generalization means inference or derivation of a law or rule, usually from the observation of particular examples.

(31)

3) Context of Learning

Brown (2000: 226) states context of learning refers to the factors in students’ learning, such as teacher and textbook. The teacher or textbook used by the students may give students incorrect information, which makes the students have false concept of particular forms of language.

4) Communication Strategies

Communication strategies, according to Brown (2000: 227), “were defined and related to learning styles. Learners obviously use production strategies in order to enhance getting their message across, but at times these techniques can themselves become source of errors.” The example is when a learner says,“Let us work for the well done of our country.”While it shows a little twist of humor, the sentence had an incorrect approximation of the wordwelfare.

e. Error Evaluation

Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) explain that error evaluation is conducted to determine which errors should be given instruction. It includes some steps:

1) Selecting errors which should be evaluated

2) Deciding the criterion where the errors should be judged

3) Preparing the instruments for evaluating errors: a set of instructions, the erroneous sentence or text, and a method to evaluate errors

(32)

2. Indirect Speech

According to Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman (1999), indirect speech is used “when one wishes to report the content of the original source without necessarily repeating sentences exactly as they were originally uttered” (p. 687). Indirect speech is derived from direct speech. Direct speech “refers to reproducing words exactly as they were originally spoken” (Azar, 1993: 273). Direct speech and indirect speech have different form. The main difference is in the way of writing. According to Azar (1993), direct speech always uses quotation marks. Meanwhile, in indirect speech, there are no quotation marks.

Yule (2004) states indirect speech is introduced by a Quotative Frame. Quotative Frame consists of three parts. They are attributed speakers (e.g.,he, she, the boss, my teacher), reporting verb (e.g., said, asked, tell, report), and conjunction (e.g., that, if, whether). Quotative Frame is also called reporting clause. The reporting clause then followed by reported clause, which consists of the clause that is reported in the speech. For example:

[1] Smith reports (that) budget cuts may occur during this recession. (Yule, 2004: 688)

In example [1], the clause “Smith reports that…” is called reporting clause. The wordreport is called reporting verb. While the clause “…budget cuts may occur during this recession” is called reported clause. In the example, the word that is put in the bracket since it is optional. According to Thomson and Martinet (1986: 254), it is allowed to omit thatwhen the reporting verb is sayor

(33)

tell. However, when reporting verb likecomplain, explain, object, and point outis used,thatcannot be omitted.

a. Changes in Transferring Direct Speech into Indirect Speech

In changing direct speech into indirect speech, there should be some changes in some aspects, like in the tense, demonstrative, personal pronoun, adverb of time and place, and word order (Yule, 2004).

1) Tense

According to Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman (1999: 689), “…the tense in reported clause is in some sense controlled by the tense in the reporting clause, such as when the reporting verb is in the past tense, the verb in the reported clause must be back shifted.” For example, when the direct speech is “I’m leaving tomorrow”,the backshift is presented in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2: The Examples of Backshift (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 689) Reporting Verb Tense Indirect Speech Simple Presentno backshift She says that she is leaving tomorrow. Present Perfectno backshift She has said that she is leaving tomorrow. Simple Past  to past progressive

tense

She said that she was leaving tomorrow/the next day.

Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman (1999) state there are also some exceptions in backshift. There will be no backshifts if:

1) The event stated by the speaker remains true. 2) What is conveyed by the speaker is general truth.

3) The statement is reported to third person by a second person immediately after it is said by the first person.

(34)

2) Pronouns

The change of personal pronoun depends on the reporter’s point of view toward the first speaker. Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman (1999: 698) state there is commonly a change from first- and second-person forms of pronoun to third-person forms in transferring direct speech into indirect speech. For example:

[2] Original quote by Mary: “Ihope thatFredgets better soon.”

Report by Fred: Mary says thatshehopes thatIget better soon. Report by someone speaking to Fred: Mary says thatshehopes that youget better soon. (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 698) 3) Demonstratives and Adverbials of Time and Place

Yule (2004) states, “The form of the indirect speech version will reflect the reporter’s sense of closeness or distance between the situation being reported and the current reporting situation” (p. 273). Yule’s statement is applied in the use of demonstratives and adverb of time and place, for example:

[3] Smith: “School budgets will not be cut during this recession.”

Smith predicted that no school budget cuts would occur duringthis recession.

Smith predicted that no school budget cuts would occur duringthat recession. (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 696)

In example [3], the use of this or thatdepends on the reporter’s assumption. The reporter uses this when the recession is still in the process at the time when the reporter is reporting Smith’s statement. Meanwhile, the reporter uses that when the recession has been overtime when the reporter is speaking.

(35)

What happened in example [3] also happened in the use of adverb of place. A reporter can usethereorherebased on the place where s/he is reporting. Some shifts in adverb of time are presented in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3: Shifts in Adverbial Time (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 697) Direct Speech Indirect Speech

this… (day, afternoon, etc.) that… (day, afternoon, etc.)

now then/ at that time

today/tonight that day/that night

yesterday the day before/ the previous day tomorrow the day after/ the next day the next… the following…

…ago …before

4) Word Order

According to Swan (1980), shift in word order happens in indirect question. It is because the direct question should be changed into statement in indirect speech.

b. Basic Forms of Indirect Speech

Thomson and Martinet (1986) mention some basic forms of indirect speech based on the types of sentence being derived. They are indirect statement, indirect question, indirect command and indirect exclamation.

1) Indirect Statement

Indirect statement is derived from direct statement. Reporting verb in indirect statement can be in the form of present or past. When the reporting verb is in the form of past tense, there will be tense shifts.

(36)

2) Indirect Question

According to Thomson and Martinet (1986: 260), in transferring direct question into indirect question, there should be shifts in the tenses, pronouns, possessives, and adverb of time or place. Swan (1980) mentions that shift in word order will also happen because the direct question should be changed into statement in indirect speech. Besides, the question mark should not be used since the form of interrogative is changed to affirmative.

Reporting verbs that are usually used in indirect speech are ask, inquire, wonder, and want to know. When ask is used, it can be followed by an indirect object. Meanwhile, the word inquire, wonder, andwant to knoware not followed by indirect object.

Question can be divided into two forms. The first is WH-questions, or questions which use questions word (when, where, who, why, which, how). The second is yes-no questions or questions with no question words. It will be some differences in forming those two different forms of question. Thomson and Martinet (1986: 260) state, in transferring direct question into indirect WH-question, the question word should be repeated in the indirect form, for example:

[4] She said, “What do you want?”

She asked them what they wanted. (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 260)

In Yes-No question, conjunctionif orwhethercan be used, but it is more usual to useif. For example:

(37)

The police officer asked if/whether I had seen the accident. (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 260)

The word whether underlines that a choice has to be made” (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 260). Thus, the word whether can be followed by to infinitive, especially when the reporting verb iswonderorwant to know. For example:

[6] “Shall/should I wait for them or go on?” he wondered. He wondered whether to wait for them or go on.

He wondered whether he should wait for them or go on. (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 260)

3) Indirect Command

Indirect command is derived from direct command. Reporting verb that are usually used are comrade, request, and advice, which are followed byobject + infinitive in positive form. Meanwhile, in negative form,not + infinitive is added (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 261). The addressed person is usually not mentioned in direct form. For example:

[7] He said, “Get your coat, Tom!”

He told Tom to get his coat. (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 261) [8] “Don’t swim out too far, boys!” I said.

I warned the boys not to swim out too far. (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 261)

According to Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman (1999), besides using to + infinitive, commands can also be reported by using ordinary that-clauses, for example:

(38)

[9] “Please go away!”

He said that I should go away. (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 692)

4) Indirect Exclamation

Indirect exclamation is derived from direct exclamation. The exclamation form should be changed into statement in indirect form. Thus, the exclamation mark should be omitted. Exclamations withwhat a…orhow…can be reported by using reporting verb like say and exclaim or “by give exclamation of delight/disgust/horror/relief/surprise etc” (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 264). Besides changing the word order, according to Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman (1983: 465), exclamation can also be reported without any changes in word order. For example:

[10] He said, “What a dreadful idea!” or “How dreadful!” He exclaimed that it was a dreadful idea.

He exclaimed that it was dreadful. (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 264)

[11] Rachel said, “What a beautiful day!”

Rachel exclaimed what a beautiful day (it was). [12] “Good!” he exclaimed.

He gave an exclamation of pleasure/satisfaction. (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 264)

(39)

D. Theoretical Framework

This research focuses on errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. The first objective of the research is to find errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. The second objective is to find the possible causes of errors. Error analysis is used to achieve the objectives. In conducting error analysis, Corder’s steps of error analysis are used. The steps include collecting a sample of learner language, identifying errors, describing errors, explaining errors, and evaluating errors.

The first step is collecting a sample of learner language. In this step, some information about the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University is collected. In this case, some factors which are presented in Table 2.1 are collected. However, the factors collected are those which are considered to give more influence to this research.

The first information is the students’ first language, which will influence the analysis of the possible cause of the errors. The second factor is the students’ proficiency level. In this case, it is not determined whether the students are in intermediate or advanced level but it is in what level the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University have learned direct and indirect speech. It is to make sure that the types of direct-indirect speech provided in the test have been learned by the students.

The second step is identifying errors. In this step, what the learners produce and what native speakers in the same level produce are compared. Since

(40)

there are no native speakers as comparative, this step is substituted by comparing what the students produce in the test to the answer key from the test which has been prepared before.

In the next step, describing errors, the errors which are found in the test are categorized. In this research, Chomsky’s definition of error, which states that there is no differentiation between errors and mistakes, is used. It is defined that all deviations or wrong forms were categorized as errors. This is based on the reason that the test is only conducted once. Therefore, it will be impossible to see the student’s progress, whether the deviations are made consistently or not. In categorizing the errors, surface structure taxonomy is used. Before applying surface structure taxonomy to categorize the errors, the errors are categorized based on the shifts that should be applied in transferring direct speech into indirect speech.

The next step is explaining errors. In this step, there is an analysis about the errors made by the students and a categorization of the sources of errors based Brown’s theory on sources of errors. The sources of the errors are categorized into four types. They are interlingual transfer, intralingual transfer, context of learning, and communication strategies. In this research, only interlingual transfer and intralingual transfer which will be used. The other two sources, context of learning and communication strategies, are considered not applicable because the students’ process of learning and the way they communicate are not investigated. The rest of the sources of errors which do not belong to Brown’s theory will be categorized into other sources of errors.

(41)

The last step is evaluating errors. In this step, errors which should be given instructions are chosen. The errors chosen are the errors which happen in the students answers in the test. Since the purpose of this research is to find the students’ errors and the possible causes of the errors, this step is not to design some instructions or instruments to evaluate the students’ errors. However, this step is aimed to give recommendation on which errors the lecturers and the students should pay more attention.

The theory of indirect speech is used as the reference in designing the test as the instrument of the research. Indirect speech can be used in all types of sentence or utterance, like statement, question, command, and exclamation. In this research, the focus is on the students’ errors in forming indirect statement, indirect question, indirect command, and indirect exclamation.

It has been mentioned in the theoretical description that there should be shifts in transferring direct speech into indirect speech. The most dominant shift is the shift of tenses, or called backshift. Generally, backshift happens when the reporting verb is in the form of past tense. In addition, there is no backshift when the reported clause in the direct speech is in the form of past tense. In detail, the backshifts are presented in Table 2.4.

(42)

Table 2.4: Backshifts in Tenses

Direct Speech Indirect Speech Simple Present Tense Simple Past Tense

Present Continuous Tense Past Continuous Tense Present Perfect Tense Past Perfect Tense Simple Past Tense Ø or Past Perfect Tense

Past Continuous Tense Ø or Past Perfect Continuous Tense Past Perfect Tense Ø

Simple Future Tense Conditional Sentence

Future Continuous Tense Conditional Continuous Tense Future Perfect Tense Conditional Perfect

Future Perfect Continuous Tense Conditional Perfect Continuous Modal Auxiliaries (Present) Modal Auxiliaries (Past)

However, the kinds of shifts, which have been mentioned before, do not always happen in all types of indirect speech. The shifts which happen in indirect statements do not always happen in indirect questions, indirect commands, and indirect exclamations. For sentences using demonstratives or adverbs, the shifts should be applied. It is because the assumption is that the students, who have a role as the reporter, are in different time and context when they report the direct speech. The possible shifts happen in each type of indirect speech are summarized in Table 2.5.

Table 2.5: Shifts in Different Types of Indirect Speech

No. Types of IS

Shifts Tense

Pro-noun

Demons-trative Adverb

Word Order

1. Indirect Statement √ √ √ √

-2. Indirect Question √ √ √ √ √

3. Indirect Command √ √ √ √

(43)

25 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the research methodology. It consists of six parts. They are research method, research setting, research subject, instruments and data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and research procedure.

A. Research Method

The method used in this research was survey research. According to Fraenkel and Wallen (2008: 390), survey research is a research in which the information is gathered from a group of people with a purpose to obtain the description of some aspects or characteristics of the group. The information can be obtained through asking questions to a sample, not merely all members of the population. In this research, a survey, with a test as the instrument, was conducted to answer the first research question. The survey was aimed to find errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.

To acquire the answer to the second research question, which was aimed to find the possible causes of errors made by the students in forming indirect speech, a library study is used. It means that the researcher analyzed the errors made by students and then related the finding to some existing theories about the causes of errors.

(44)

B. Research Setting

This research was carried out on May-June 2012. It was the even semester in 2011/2012 academic year of English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) of Sanata Dharma University. Since the focus of the research was about forming indirect speech, which was commonly taught in Structure Classes, the researcher set Structure IV Class in ELESP as the setting of the research. They were Structure IV class B and Structure IV Class D. The research for class B was conducted on May 30, 2012. While, on June 6, 2012, the researcher conducted the research in class D.

C. Research Participants

This research focused on errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. It means that the target population of this research was the fourth semester students of ELESP. In this case, the fourth semester students were those who entered the university in 2010/2011 academic year, and they were in the second year of their study in ELESP.

Fourth semester students were chosen since the researcher considered that they have learned indirect speech in their previous Structure Class. They learned indirect speech when they were in the third semester, especially in Structure III Class. By conducting this research, the researcher would be able to analyze what errors they still made in forming indirect speech after they learned it in the previous semester. The finding of this research could also be used by the fourth

(45)

semester students as the guideline in mastering indirect speech by learning from the errors they still made. It is important for them to master indirect speech in case they need to teach their students about indirect speech in their real teaching.

The researcher assumed that all members of the fourth semester students’ population had equal ability in forming indirect speech because they had taken Structure III classes, where they learned about indirect speech. Thus, it was expected that there was no significant difference in their ability in forming indirect speech. The samples chosen were two Structure IV Classes based on the reason that indirect speech was taught in Structure Classes.

Specifically, the classes chosen were Structure IV class B and Structure Class D of 2011/2012 academic year. It was assumed that the students of those two classes were able to represent the characteristics of the fourth semester students’ population. From the sample chosen, the researcher eliminated the students who were not from 2010/2011 academic year since it is considered that they had different grammar mastery from 2010/2011 academic year students.

D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique

The researcher used test as the instrument. Test, according to Brown (2004), is “a method of measuring a person’s ability, knowledge, or performance in a given domain” (p. 3). It helped the researcher to measure students’ knowledge in forming indirect speech. From the students’ answers to the questions in the test, the researcher was able to find out the errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.

(46)

Due to the importance of test as the instrument in this research, the test was designed based on test requirements. An effective test should have validity and reliability.

1. Validity

Gronlund, as cited by Brown (2004), states that validity, which is the most important standard of effective test, is “the extent to which inferences made from assessment results are appropriate, meaningful, and useful in terms of the purpose of the assessment” (p. 22). It is simply said that a test will be valid if it really measures what should be measured.

In this research, the test was the instrument to measure students’ knowledge about indirect speech. Thus, the test designed in this research should really measure the students’ knowledge about indirect speech. There are some types of validity: content validity, construct validity, and face validity.

a. Content Validity

Brown (2004) states that “…if it requires the test taker to perform the behavior that is being measured, it can claim content-related evidence of validity, often popularly referred to as content validity” (p. 22). The test was intended to find errors made by students in forming indirect speech. To be valid in the content, the test should demand the students to form indirect speech by changing direct speech into indirect speech. Since indirect speech has some types, the researcher provided the basic types of indirect speech in the test item. The distribution of each type is shown in Table 3.1.

(47)

Table 3.1: Test Items Distribution based on the Basic Types of Indirect Speech Types of Indirect Speech Total Number Number

Statement 5 1, 6, 11, 16, 21

WH-Question 5 2, 7, 12, 17, 22

Yes-No Question 5 3, 8, 13, 18, 23

Command 5 4, 9, 14, 19, 24

Exclamation 5 5, 10, 15, 20, 25

Besides distributing the test items based on the types of indirect speech, the researcher also distributed the types of shifts in each item. The purpose of distributing all types of shifts in the test items was to know in what kind of shifts students still made errors.

b. Construct Validity

Brown (2004) explains that to have construct validity, a test should demonstrate the elements of the test subject. For instance, in a speaking interview test, all aspects in speaking should be involved, such as fluency, accuracy, pronunciation, and vocabulary. Hence, in conducting a speaking interview test, the test takers should be demanded to speak in order to find students’ ability in fluency, accuracy, pronunciation, and vocabulary.

In this research, the test was aimed to find errors made by students in forming indirect speech. From that reason, written test in the form of transferring direct speech into indirect speech was used. The test would be in the form of filling-in the blank. There would be 25 items of direct speech and the test takers’ task was to change them into indirect speech. The students would not rewrite all parts of the indirect speech because the researcher had provided the reporting clause to be continued by the test takers. The aim of using fill-in the blank test

(48)

was that it is more practical than rewriting form because it would not take too much time for students to write their answers. Besides, the students’ authentic answers would be clearer compared to multiple-choice test since there was less opportunity for them to predict or choose the answers randomly.

c. Face Validity

“Face validity means that the students perceive the test to be valid” (Brown, 2004: 27). It means that face validity is validity that appeared from the students’ perspective. Brown (2004) states that face validity would be fulfilled if the students found:

- the test is built well with familiar tasks

- the total number and the time allocation in doing the test are balanced - the test items are not complicated

- the test provides clear and understandable directions - the test really measures what should be measured

The face validity would be known through students’ responses to the pilot test. From the pilot test, the researcher would be able to know what should be improved from the test items.

2. Test Reliability

“A reliable test is consistent and dependable” (Brown, 2004: 20). The test reliability can be estimated through reliability coefficient. According to Fraenkel and Wallen (2008), reliability coefficient shows the “relationship between scores

(49)

of the same individual parts of the same instrum

Related to the t using the relationship be same instrument. It wa conduct one pilot test approach in calculati formulas. They are KR KR21 is used when the Besides, it is used for researcher chose KR21 according to Fraenkel a

From the formul M is the mean of the s of test scores. Reliabi (1983), there is a criter

Table 3.2.: Crude Cr Coefficien .00 to .20 .20 to .40 .40 to .60 .60 to .80 .80 to 1.00

viduals on the same instrument at two different tim instruments” (p. 155).

the time efficiency, the researcher checked the test onship between scores on the same individuals on tw It was considered more efficient since the resear ot test only. In this case, the researcher used Kude

lculating the reliability coefficient, which has are KR20 and KR21. According to Fraenkel and W hen the test items are considered having the same di used for items that are scored right versus wrong.

KR21 formula in counting the reliability coef enkel and Wallen (2008: 156) is formulated as:

formula, it is known that K shows the number of of the set of test scores, and SD is the standard devi eliability coefficient ranges from 0.00-1.00. Acc

criterion of coefficient, which is shown in Table 3.2.

de Criterion for the Evaluation of a Coefficient (Bes fficient (r) Relationshi .00 to .20

.20 to .40 .40 to .60 .60 to .80 .80 to 1.00

Negligible Low Moderate Substantial High to very hi

rent times, or on two

the test reliability by s on two parts of the researcher needed to d Kuder-Richardson has two kinds of l and Wallen (2008), same difficulty level. rong. Therefore, the y coefficient. KR21,

ber of the test items. d deviation of the set According to Best able 3.2.

t (Best, 1983: 255) ionship

ligible oderate tantial very high

(50)

E. Data Analysis Technique

After obtaining the students’ test result, the researcher checked the students’ answers in the test. Then, the researcher classified the errors into some categories. The classifications were based on the type of indirect speech. After that, the researcher categorized the errors based on the types of changes including pronoun, adverb of time or place, tense, word order, demonstrative, and conjunction. When it was possible, the researcher also categorized the errors based on the Dulay et al.’s surface structure taxonomy (1982), which is divided into omission, addition, misformation, and misordering. Through those processes, the first research questions would be answered.

For the second research question, which was aimed to find possible causes of errors made by students, the researcher used the previous categorization and then analyzed the data by relating them to the existing theory. The theory used was Brown’s theory about sources of errors (2000), in which the sources of errors are divided into four categories. They are intralingual transfer, interlingual transfer, context of learning, and communication strategies.

F. Research Procedure

The research was conducted in some steps, which are asking permission to conduct the test, conducting the pilot test, gathering the data, analyzing the data, and reporting the result of the research.

(51)

1. Asking Permission to Conduct the Test

After finishing the final version of the test design, the researcher asked permission from the lecturers of the chosen Structure IV Classes which had been decided to be the sample of the research to conduct the pilot test and the real test. 2. Conducting Pilot Test

The purpose of conducting pilot test was to check the designed test, whether it still needed some adjustment or not. The pilot test was given to a class which was considered to have the same characteristics as the real sample. Therefore, the researcher chose one class from Structure IV Class’ parallel, which is Class C of Structure IV Class. The pilot test was conducted on May 10, 2012. 3. Checking the Test Reliability

After conducting the pilot test, the researcher checked the students’ errors and finding the reliability coefficient of the test. The test reliability determined whether the test was reliable enough or not to be used as an instrument. The reliability in the pilot test reached 0.74. Thus, the test was categorized as reliable test.

4. Conducting the Real Test

In this step, the researcher conducted the test to the real sample of the research. After they finished the test, the researcher separated the results from non-fourth semester students because they were not included as the sample.

5. Analyzing the Data

The researcher checked the students’ test result and classified the errors made by the students based on the types of indirect speech and the categories of

(52)

error. After that, the researcher analyzed the possible causes of errors by referring to some theories about the causes of errors.

6. Writing Up the Report

After analyzing the data, the researcher reported the result based on the data analysis.

(53)

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter deals with the research results and discussion. It discusses the answer to the research questions based on the research results. This chapter is divided into two parts. The first part is to answer the first research question about what errors made by the fourth semester students of ELESP in forming indirect speech. The second part is to discuss the answer to the second research question about the possible causes of errors.

A. Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Speech

In this research, the students’ errors in forming indirect speech were analyzed using error analysis. According to Corder (1974), as stated by Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005: 57), there are some steps in error analysis. They are collecting sample of learners’ language, identifying errors, describing errors, explaining errors, and evaluating errors. Students’ errors were found through the step of identifying errors.

The students’ errors in forming indirect speech, which were found in the step of identifying errors, were discussed based on the basic types of indirect speech. They were errors in indirect statements, indirect WH-questions, indirect yes-no questions, indirect commands, and indirect exclamations. After being identified, the errors were categorized based on the changes and surface structure taxonomy.The step of categorizing errors is called describing errors.

(54)

1. Errors in Indirect Statements

There were five items of direct statements in the test which were distributed in items 1, 6, 11, 16 and 21. The percentage of the students who made errors in forming indirect statements was presented in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1: Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Statements Item Number Number of Students Who Made Errors Percentage (%)

1 6 11 16 21

18 50 12 17 44

27.27 75.75 18.18 25.75 66.66

It is shown in Table 4.1 that most of the students’ answers in forming indirect statements were categorized as errors. The common students’ errors in forming indirect statement included errors in tenses, pronouns, conjunctions, demonstratives, and adverbs, there were also errors in special cases.

Error in the tense commonly happened because the students did not back shift the tense which should be back shifted. The error was shown in example [13].

[13] a. Direct Speech“I have something to show to you,” I told her. b. Indirect SpeechI told her (that) I had something to show to her.

c. Incorrect Answer*I told her thatI have something to show to you.

The tense of the reported clause in example [13] should be back shifted since the reporting clause was in the form of past tense. Thus, the tense should be

(55)

changed from present perfect into past perfect. However, some students formed the indirect speech without changing the tenses in the reported clause. They still kept the form of verb have as it was in the direct statement. However, the word

haveshould be changed intohad.

Besides error in the tense, error in the use of pronoun can also be found in example [13]. It is shown that students did not change the pronoun you. The

pronounyouin example [13] should be changed intohersince it was assumed that

I, as the reporter, reported what s/he talked to you to someone else, which made

the reporter should mentionyouin the indirect speech asher.

In surface structure taxonomy, both the error in the tense and the pronoun shown in example [13] could be categorized as misformation error. The tense error was called misformation because the students used the wrong form of tense. They used present perfect tense instead of past perfect tense. While, the error in pronoun was also called as misformation error because there was a wrong usage of pronoun, in which the students usedyouinstead ofher.

Another form of error made by the students in forming indirect statement was error in conjunction, which was found in example [14].

[14] a. Direct Speech Mr. Garner told the children, “There are seven days in one week.”

b. Indirect Speech  Mr. Garner told the children (that) there are seven days in one week.

c. Students’ Answer*Mr. Garner told the childrenif there are 7 days in one week.

(56)

Example [14] clearly shows that the errors happened in the use of if

instead of that as the conjunction in indirect statement. This error could be

categorized as misformation, because there was an existence of conjunction but the form was incorrect. Conjunction if should not be used as conjunction in

indirect statement, because it was commonly used as conjunction in indirect yes-no question, which meansapakah. The use ofifmade the meaning of the sentence

ambiguous, whether it expressed statement or yes-no question.

Besides errors in the tense, pronoun, and conjunction, errors of demonstrative and adverb of time also happened in forming indirect speech. The errors are shown in example [15].

[15] a. Direct SpeechMichael said, “I had seen these girls three days ago.” b. Indirect Speech  Michael said (that) he had seen those girls three days before.

c. Incorrect Answer  *Michael said that he had seen these girls three days ago.

In example [15], the error in demonstrative is shown on the use of these

instead ofthose. Additionally, the adverb error was found on the use ofthree days

agoinstead ofthree days before. Since the reporting verb was in the form of past,

it was assumed that the adverb and the demonstrative should be changed. The adverb three days ago should be changed into three days before. While, the

demonstrative these should be changed into those. In fact, some students formed

the indirect speech without changing the demonstrative and the adverb. Those two kinds of errors in example [15] could be categorized as misformation errors. They

(57)

were categorized as misformation error since the form of the demonstrative and the adverb in the indirect statement used by the students was incorrect.

Errors in indirect statement also happened in some items with special case. The example of the errors was shown in example [16].

[16] a. Direct SpeechMy teacher said, “The earth is round.” b. Indirect SpeechMy teacher said(that) the earth is round.

c. Incorrect Answer*My teacher saidthat the earth was round.

Example [16] was categorized as special case because the clause reported in the sentence was general truth. Thus, it should be no changes in the tense although the reporting verb was in the form of past. Yet, some students changed the tense into past by changing the wordisintowas.

In surface structure taxonomy, the error in example [16] was considered as misformation. It was categorized as so since the students used the wrong form of tense in the indirect statement. They changed the form of simple present tense in the direct speech into simple past tense in the indirect speech although the reported speech was categorized as general truth.

2. Errors in Indirect WH-Questions

In the test, direct questions were distributed into five items. WH-questions existed in items 2, 7, 12, 17, and 22. The percentage of students’ errors in forming indirect WH-questions is presented in Table 4.2.

(58)

Table 4.2: Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect WH-Questions Item Number Number of Students Who Made Errors Percentage (%)

2 7 12 17 22

58 18 24 28 49

87.87 27.27 36.36 42.42 74.24

The table shows that errors still happened in the students’ answers in transferring direct WH-questions into indirect WH-questions. Tenses still became the main problem for students in transferring direct speech into indirect speech. Besides the tenses, the students still made errors in pronouns, demonstratives and adverbs. The same as indirect statement, errors in special case also happened in special case.

The first example of students’ erroneous answer in forming indirect WH-questions was shown in example [17].

[17] a. Direct Speech  Mrs. Brown asked me, “When will you submit this assignment?”

b. Indirect Speech  Mr. Brown asked me when I would submit that assignment.

c. Incorrect Answer  *Mr. Brown asked me when you will submit that assignment.

It is clearly shown in example [17] that errors in the tense and pronoun happened. The error in the tense was shown in the use of present future tense in the indirect speech. The students still used will instead of would. However, the

(59)

tense in example [17] should be back shifted into past future tense because the direct question had past reporting clause. In addition, the pronoun you should be

changed intoIbecauseyouin the direct speech referred to the reporter. In fact, the

students still used pronoun you without changing it into I. In example [17],

students formed indirect question by using the wrong form of tense. Besides, the wrong form of pronoun was also used. Thus, those two kinds of errors shown in example [17] were categorized as misformation error because the students used the wrong form of pronoun and tense.

Other kinds of errors happened in the form of demonstrative error. The error can be found in example [18].

[18] a. Direct Speech  Mrs. Brown asked me, “When will you submit this assignment?”

b. Indirect Speech  Mr. Brown asked me when I would submit that assignment.

c. Incorrect Answer  *Mr. Brown asked me when will I submit this assignment.

Demonstrative error in example [18] was shown in the use of this. The word this

should be changed into thatin the indirect question because the direct speech had

past reporting verb. Nevertheless, the students still kept the original form of the demonstrative. This error was called misformation error because the demonstrative used in the indirect speech was incorrect.

Error in word order can also be found in example [18]. The error happened in the order of the auxiliary verb willand the pronoun I. The pronounIshould be

(60)

placed before the auxiliary verb because the form of the reported clause was no longer an interrogative, but it was changed into positive form. In surface structure taxonomy, this error could be classified into misordering error. It was because incorrect placement of words happened.

Another example of erroneous answer is shown in example [19].

[19] a. Direct SpeechDedy asked Dina, “How long had you been waiting for me here?”

b. Indirect Speech Dedy asked Dina how long she had been waiting for him there.

c. Incorrect Answer*Dedy asked Dinathat how long had she being been waiting for him here.

Besides errors in the tense and word order, there were also errors in conjunction and demonstrative in example [19].

Error in the use of conjunction was shown in the use of that in

WH-question.Thatshould not be used as conjunction in indirect WH-question, but it is

used in indirect statement, command, or exclamation. Indirect WH-question does not need any additional conjunction. Thus, based on surface structure taxonomy, this error could be categorized as addition error. It was because the students added unnecessary conjunction which should not be used in indirect WH-questions

Error in adverb can also be found in example [19]. The error is shown on the use of adverb here in the indirect WH-question. It indicates that the students

did not change the adverb in transferring direct question into indirect question. However, here as the adverb of time, should be changed into there. This kind of

(61)

error could be categorized as misformation error. It was because in the indirect speech, the student used the wrong form of adverb in the indirect speech.

3. Errors in Indirect Yes-No Questions

The same as other types of indirect speech, yes-no questions were distributed in five items. They existed in items 3, 8, 13, 18, and 23. The percentage of students who still made errors in forming indirect yes-no question was presented in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Yes-No Questions Item Number Number of Students Who Made Errors Percentage (%)

3 8 13 18 23

20 13 28 33 37

30.30 19.69 42.42 50.00 56.06

Errors in pronouns, word order, tenses, and demonstratives were found in indirect yes-no questions. The example of errors in tenses, word order, and pronoun can be found in example [20].

[20] a. Direct Speech“Can I get coffee on the train?” my aunt asked. b. Indirect SpeechMy aunt askedif she could get coffee on the train.

c. Incorrect Answer*My aunt askedcould I get coffee on the train.

Pronoun error is indicated by the use of pronoun I as in the indirect

(62)

was changed into indirect speech because it referred to the reporter’s aunt.

However, some students kept the pronoun I as it was in the direct speech. This

error, in surface structure taxonomy, was called as misformation error. It was categorized as misformation error because the wrong form of pronoun was used by the students.

Example [20] also shows an error in the word order. The form My aunt

asked could I get coffee… was considered as error in word order because there

was a misplacement of the words could and I. The position of could should be

placed after the wordshebecause the clause was changed from interrogative form

into positive form. This error could be classified into misordering error because in this case, the students used wrong order of some words.

Additionally, example [20] indicates that there is an omission error. Students omitted the conjunction if or whether. However, they directly used the

auxiliary verb could after the reporting clause. The use of those conjunctions in

indirect yes-no questions, which can be translated asapakahinBahasa Indonesia,

cannot be omitted since they had an important role as the indicator that the meaning and the form of the sentence was yes-no question.

Errors in the tense and demonstrative were also found in students’ answer in transferring direct yes-no question into indirect yes-no question. Those cases of errors are shown in example [21].

[21] a. Direct Speech“Does this train stop in New York?” asked Bill. b. Indirect SpeechBill askedif that train stopped in New York.

(63)

Example [21] clearly shows that the tense and demonstrative error happened on the use of the verb stop and the demonstrative this in the indirect

question. In this item, the wordthisshould be changed intothatand the wordstop

should be stopped. The reported clause in the indirect question should be in the

form of past tense because the item had past reporting clause. Those two errors, which happened in the tense and demonstrative, could be categorized as misformation error since the students used the wrong form of tense and demonstrative in the indirect yes-no question.

The last error made by the students in forming indirect yes-no questions was error in the adverb of time. This error can be found in example [22].

[22] a. Direct Speech  “Will you watch the football match next week?” she said to me.

b. Indirect Speech She asked meif I would watch the football match the following week.

c. Incorrect Answer  *She asked meif I would watch the football match next week.

It is shown in example [22] that the students kept the form of the adverb asnext

week. However, the adverb should be changed intothe following weekbecause the

direct speech had past reporting clause. The same as the errors in example [21], this error was categorized as misformation since the students used the wrong form of adverb. The adverbnext week, which was should be changed into the following

(64)

4. Errors in Indirect Commands

Indirect commands existed in five items of the test. They were distributed in items 4, 9, 14, 19, and 24. Table 4.4 presents the percentage of students who still made errors in forming indirect commands.

Table 4.4: Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Commands Item Number Number of Students Who Made Errors Percentage (%)

4 9 14 19 24

2 5 21 38 34

03.03 07.57 31.81 57.57 51.51

The number presented in Table 4.4 shows that the students’ answers in transferring direct commands into indirect commands contained errors. There were various errors in forming indirect commands. The errors were in common with the previous types of indirect speech. They were in the form of tense, word order, conjunction, adverb, and demonstrative.

The first form of error in forming indirect commands was error in the tense. The case is shown in example [23].

[23] a. Direct Speech“Shut the door, Tom,” she said. b. Indirect SpeechShe asked Tomto shut the door.

c. Incorrect Answer*She asked Tomshutted the door.

The tense error in example [23] was found in the use of verb shutted in the

(65)

speech. However, the tense change should be from shut into to shut because the

verb in the direct command should be changed into to + infinitive in the indirect

command. This error could be categorized as both addition error and omission error. It was because the students omitted the word to, and they added –ed to the

wordshut.

Another form of students’ error in forming indirect command is shown in example [24]. In this item, the students made addition error by adding if as the

conjunction in indirect command. Indirect command should not use any conjunction. There should be to + infinitive after the reporting clause. This error

then could be categorized as addition error since the students added conjunctionif,

which should not be added into indirect commands.

[24] a. Direct Speech“Lend him your pen for a moment,” I said to Mary. b. Indirect SpeechI asked Maryto lend him her pen for a moment.

c. Incorrect Answer  *I asked Mary if she could lend him a pen for a moment.

Furthermore, the form …could lend him… was considered as tense error.

The reported clause in indirect command can be changed without using to +

infinitive after the reporting clause but by using that +subject + should + V1.

However, the students’ answer in this example was considered as error because the students used could instead of should, which was considered as the wrong

form. The use of if and could in indirect command, as shown in the incorrect

answer in example [24] then changed the meaning of the sentence into indirect question.

(66)

Example [25] shows error in word order. The error was on the use of wrong order of the words to and not in negative command. The correct order

should benot to, but the students used the wrong order asto not.

[25] a. Direct Speech“Don’t believe everything you hear,” he warned me. b. Indirect SpeechHe warned menot to believe everything I heard.

c. Incorrect Answer*He warned meto not believe everything I heard.

Based on surface structure taxonomy, this error in word order was called misordering. It was called so because there was misplacement in some morphemes. In this case, the morphemes weretoandnot.

The next errors found in forming indirect command are illustrated in example [26]. The errors were in the form of adverb error and demonstrative error.

[26] a. Direct Speech  “Please fill up this form now,” the secretary asked me.

b. Indirect SpeechThe secretary asked meto fill up that form then.

c. Incorrect Answer*The secretary asked meto fill up this form now.

The students’ answers in example [26] indicate that errors in demonstratives and adverbs happened. The error in demonstrative found in the use of word this

instead of that. The error in adverb was found in the use of now instead of then.

However, demonstrative and the adverb should be changed because there was an assumption that the demonstrative and the adverb should be changed when the reporting verb was in the form of past. Since there were some wrong forms of morphemes used, these kinds of errors were categorized as misformation error.

(67)

5. Errors in Indirect Exclamations

The same as the other types of indirect speech, indirect exclamations was also distributed in five items, which were in items 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25. Some students still made errors in forming indirect exclamation. The number of students’ who made errors is presented in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5: Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Exclamations Item Number Number of Students Who Made Errors Percentage (%)

5 10 15 20 25

10 28 22 15 35

15.15 42.42 33.33 22.72 53.03

From Table 4.5, it can be stated that error still happened in the students’ answer. As the other types of indirect speech, many errors were still found in the students’ answer in the test. The errors found in indirect exclamation were errors in tenses, word order, pronouns, and conjunctions.

Two types of errors were found in example [27]. They were error in the tense and pronoun.

[27] a. Direct SpeechJane always says, “What a beautiful girl I am!” b. Indirect SpeechJane always saysthat she is beautiful.

c. Incorrect Answer*Jane always saysthat I was beautiful.

The error in the tense was found in the use of past tense in the reported clause. In this case, the students used the word was instead of keeping the word as is. The

(68)

direct exclamation in example [27] had present reporting clause, so that the tense in the indirect exclamation should not be back shifted. This error was called misformation error because the students formed the wrong tense by back shifting the tense, which should not be applied in direct speech which has present reporting clause.

Error in the pronoun found in example [27] was shown on the use of Iin

the indirect command. The students did not change the pronoun but they kept the pronoun as I. However, the pronoun should be changed intoshe because Iin the

direct speech referred to Jane, not the reporter. Based on surface structure

taxonomy, this error could be categorized as misformation error, because the students used incorrect form of pronoun.

Another form of error is found in example [28]. Besides tense error, which was found on the use of present tense as in the use of is as to be, error was also

happened in the word order.

[28] a. Direct SpeechMy teacher said, “What a naughty little girl she is.” b. Indirect SpeechMy teacher saidwhat a naughty little girl she was.

c. Incorrect Answer *My teacher exclaimedwhat a naughty little girl is she.

The word isin the students’ incorrect answer should be placed after the pronoun

she. It was because when the students chose to form indirect exclamation using

the original pattern of the direct exclamation, there should be no changes in the word order. They should keep the order of thepronounandto belike they were in

(69)

taxonomy, this error was categorized as misordering, because the incorrect placement of some word happened in the indirect speech.

The last form of students’ error in forming indirect exclamation is shown in example [29].

[29] a. Direct SpeechLidya said to me, “How brave you are.” b. Indirect SpeechLidya said to methat I was brave.

c. Incorrect Answer*Lidya saidif I was brave.

Conjunction that should be used in indirect exclamation isthator it might also be

formed without using conjunction. Thus, the addition ofifcould be categorized as

misformation error. The use of if as the conjunction in the indirect exclamation

made the meaning of the exclamation sentence change into yes-no question.

B. The Possible Causes of Errors

According to Brown (2000), there are four sources of error. They are interlingual transfer, intralingual transfer, context of learning, and communication strategies. In this research, only interlingual transfer and intralingual transfer were applicable. The other two sources, context of learning and communication strategies, were not applicable because the researcher did not go further to the students’ process of learning and the way they communicate. The rest of the source of error that could not be categorized into Brown’s theory was categorized in other sources.

(70)

1. Interlingual Transfer as the Possible Cause of Errors

Brown (2000: 224) stated that interlingual transfer from the native language, or called interference, commonly happens in the beginning levels of learning second languages. In the students’ erroneous answers in the test, the researcher found that some of the errors were caused by interlingual transfer. The interlingual transfer in the students’ answers was influenced by the students’ native language, which was Indonesian language.

The first example of error, which was possibly caused by interlingual transfer, was found in the use of wrong tenses in the indirect speech. Some students used wrong forms of tenses because they did not backshift the speech which should be back shifted. This error might be influenced by Indonesian language, in which there is no tense backshifts in changing direct speech into indirect speech.

The use of wrong word order in indirect statement could also be categorized as interlingual transfer. It was because in Indonesian language, there were no changes of word order in changing direct question into indirect question, for example, in Indonesian language direct question “Dimana Anda bekerja?,”

there would be no changes in the word order, thus the indirect question would be

Dia bertanya dimana Anda bekerja.In Indonesian language, there are no changes

in the order of the word because there are no auxiliary verbs like are, is,do, and

couldlike questions in English language.

The cause of errors in the wrong order of not + to in indirect negative

(71)

to + not instead ofnot + to like in I warned them to not watch late night horror

movies. In this error, the students might form the indirect command by translating

it form Indonesian language as “Saya memperingatkan mereka untuk tidak

menonton film horror malam hari,” so that they used the wrong form of order

betweentoandnot.

Interlingual transfer could also be found in some items, in which some students did not use the right conjunction. For example in indirect yes-no question, which should use if or whether as the conjunction, the students did not

change the word order. However, they tended to put the auxiliary verb after the reporting clause without using any conjunction. It might be influenced by their first language, Indonesian language, where there is no need to add any conjunction in changing direct yes-no question into indirect yes-no question. The example is in“Apakah dia akan menonton sepak bola besok siang?”the reporter

just needs to change it as Dia bertanya apakah dia akan menonton sepak bola

besok siang. The students might think that the auxiliary verb means apakah, so

that they did not need to add any conjunction.

Another error possibly caused by interlingual transfer was in the use of if

as the conjunction in indirect statement. The right conjunction that should be used in statement is that. The students might use if because they were influenced by

their tendency in Indonesian language, in which they usually say“Wendy berkata

kalau ayahnya telah membeli sebuah mobil.” They used the word kalau, so that

(72)

2. Intralingual Transfer as the Possible Cause of Errors

The factor influencing intralingual transfer exists within the target language itself. In this context, intralingual transfer means overgeneralization, which is categorized as negative intralingual transfer (Brown, 2000: 224). In this research, the researcher found some errors, which were possibly caused by overgeneralization of some rules in forming indirect speech.

The first kind of error caused by overgeneralization was the students’ tendency to backshift the tenses in all kinds of direct speech, including in direct speech which had present form of reporting clause or direct speech which was categorized as general truth. It was found that some students changed the tense in those kinds of direct speech. In this case, the students over generalized the rule that there should be tense backshift in forming indirect speech. One example was in item #11, the students changed“The earth is round,”intoMy teacher said that

the earth was round.In fact, the tense in this sentence should not be changed into

past tense because the reported clause was categorized as general truth.

Another example of error which was possibly caused by rule overgeneralization could be found in the use of backshift indirect commands. Some students formed indirect command usingto, but thetowas followed byverb

+ edas into filled. This error might be caused by students’ generalization that the

verb in the reported clause should be back shifted. Therefore, some students changed the infinitive verb into verb + ed without noticing that to could not be

followed byverb + ed.Another form of overgeneralization was found on the use

(73)

Almost the same as the previous case, the students over generalized the tense backshift of the tense. The overgeneralization of this rule made the students use

not + V2instead ofnot + to + infinitive.

Intralingual transfer in the form of generalization could also be found on the use of if or that as the conjunction in indirect WH-questions. In forming

indirect WH-questions, those two conjunctions are not needed. This error might happen because the students over generalized the rule of the use of conjunction in indirect speech. The use ofthatwas possibly caused by overgeneralization that all

indirect speech could use that as in indirect statement. While, the use ofwhether

as the conjunction in indirect WH-questions indicated that some students over generalized the rule of using whether in all types of indirect questions, both

yes-no questions and WH-questions.

3. Other Sources of Errors

The causes of the students’ tendency not to change the pronoun, adverb, or demonstratives when they were should be changed could not be categorized both in intralingual transfer and interlingual transfer. From this reason, the researcher tried to analyze the other sources of those errors. The changes in pronouns, adverbs, and demonstratives in changing direct speech into indirect speech also happen in Indonesian language. The example can be seen in example [30].

[30] Dina berkata, “Teman saya datang ke tempat ini dua hari yang lalu”

(74)

From this example, it was shown that the changes in the pronoun, adverb, and demonstrative in Indonesian are the same in English language. The students might have no problems with the meaning of some pronouns, demonstratives, or adverbs. That is why the cause of those errors did not belong to interlingual transfer. The errors in using incorrect form of pronoun, adverb, and demonstrative were not related to overgeneralization of any rules. The rules of the changes in those aspects were applied based on the context where and when the direct speech was reported. That is the reason why the causes of those errors could not be categorized as intralingual transfer.

From those explanations, it was shown that the errors in pronouns, adverb, and demonstratives were possibly caused by other factors which were outside Brown’s theory about causes of errors. The researcher concluded that the factor caused those errors was contextualization. Contextualization in this context means the students’ unawareness toward the context of the report. The example was shown in example [13] in the previous section. In the example, the students still usedyouinstead of changing it intohim/her.

The case in example [13] indicates that the students were not aware of the context of the report. They might not notice that there were different contexts between the direct speech and the indirect speech. The direct speech indicated that

Idirectly said toyouthatIhad something to show toyou. However, in the indirect

speech, the one to whom I spoke was not you, but someone else, so that Ishould

(75)

between the direct speech and indirect speech might cause students errors in pronouns, adverbs, and demonstratives.

(76)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter contains conclusions and recommendations. It consists of two parts. The first part is the conclusion of the research results and the data analysis. The second part is the recommendations, which are addressed to Structure Class lecturers and students of the English Language Education Study Program, and to other researchers.

A. Conclusions

This research was conducted to answer two research questions. The first question was what kinds of errors made by the fourth semester students of ELESP make in forming indirect speech. The second question was what the possible causes of the students’ errors are. To answer the first research question, the researcher conducted a survey research with a test as the instrument and the fourth semester students of ELESP as the participants. While, in answering the second research question, the researcher conducted a library study.

The data obtained from the test indicated that the fourth semester students of ELESP still made errors in forming indirect speech. The finding was that about 40% of the students’ answer in transferring direct speech into indirect speech was erroneous. The errors made by students were errors in tenses, pronouns, demonstratives, adverbs, word order, and conjunction. The common case of the students’ errors in tenses was that the students did not change the tense when the

(77)

tense should be back shifted. In surface structure taxonomy, this kind of error was categorized into misformation error because the students used the wrong form of tense.

Additionally, the tenses errors happened in some special cases, in which tense changes should not be applied. Some of the students changed the tense in some special cases, in which the reporting clause was in the form of present or when the reported clause was general truth. This kind of error could be categorized as misformation because the students formed the wrong form of tenses by applying the rule of back shifting in special cases.

The cases of errors in pronouns, adverbs, and demonstratives were almost similar. Those three kinds of errors happened when the students did not change the form of pronoun, adverb, or demonstrative in indirect speech although they should be changed when the sentence was in the form of indirect speech. Those kinds of errors, based on surface structure taxonomy, could be categorized as misformation because the students used the wrong form of pronouns, adverbs, or demonstratives.

Another form of error that commonly happened was error in word order. In this kind of error, the students misplaced the position of some words. The example was found in indirect questions, in which the students did not change the position of the auxiliary verbs, and kept their position as they were in the direct speech. In surface structure taxonomy, this kind of error was called misordering error because there were some misplacement of some words.

(78)

Conjunction errors were also found in the students’ answers to the test. Commonly, the errors in conjunction happened when the students used the wrong form of conjunction. The examples are using if as the conjunction in indirect statements, using that as the conjunction in indirect questions, omitting the conjunction, or adding unneeded conjunction. The conjunction errors happened could be categorized as omission errors when the students omitted the conjunction. They were categorized as addition errors when the students added unneeded conjunction. While misformation errors happened when the students used the wrong form of conjunction.

From the kinds of the errors found in the students’ answer in the test, the researcher analyzed the possible sources of errors based on Brown’s theory about sources of errors. The errors caused by interlingual transfer were the errors which were influenced by the students’ native language, which was Indonesian language. The most common errors which were possibly caused by interlingual transfer were errors in tenses. It was categorized as so because in Indonesian language there is no tense changes when a direct speech was changed into indirect speech so that the students ignored the rule of tense changes. Another example was errors in word order, as in the use ofto + notin indirect negative imperatives. This error might be because the students translated it from Indonesian language in which they usually say untuk tidak, which made them form the word order as to not

instead ofnot to.

Different from interlingual transfer, which was influenced by the students’ native language, intralingual transfer was influenced by the factors within the

(79)

language itself. In this research, intralingual transfer refers to overgeneralization. The first kind of error caused by overgeneralization was the students’ tendency to backshift the tenses in all kinds of direct speech, including in direct speech which had present form of reporting clause or direct speech which was categorized as general truth. Another example of error that was possibly caused by rule overgeneralization could be found in the use of backshift in indirect imperatives. Some students formed indirect imperative using to, but the to was followed by

verb + ed as into filled. This error might be caused the students generalized that the verb in the reported clause should be back shifted.

The causes of the students’ tendency not to change the pronouns, adverbs, or demonstratives when they were should be changed could not be categorized both in intralingual transfer and interlingual transfer. From this reason, the researcher tried to analyze the other sources of those errors. The changes in pronouns, adverbs, and demonstratives in changing direct speech into indirect speech also happen in Indonesian language. Besides, the students might have no problems with the meaning of some pronouns, demonstratives, or adverbs. That is why the cause of those errors did not belong to interlingual transfer. In addition, the errors in using incorrect form of pronouns, adverbs, and demonstratives were not related to overgeneralization of any rules. The rules of the changes in those aspects were applied based on the context where and when the direct speech was reported.

The researcher concluded that the factor caused those errors was contextualization. Contextualization in this context means the students’

(80)

unawareness toward the context of the sentence. They might use the wrong form of pronouns, adverbs, or demonstratives because they did not notice that there were different contexts between the direct speech and the indirect speech.

B. Recommendations

The recommendations were formulated based on the research results. They were addressed to Structure Class lecturers and students of the English Language Education Study Program, and to other researchers.

1. Recommendations for the Structure Class Lecturers of ELESP

Lecturers take an important role in students’ mastery of direct and indirect speech besides the students themselves. The lecturers need to pay more attention on the students’ understanding of the topic. Students with higher ability may have understood about the topic, but sometimes the lecturers pay less attention to students with different ability who probably do not understand the topic as well as students with higher ability.

Giving students exercises which are more applicable can help the students understand more about the topic. The example is by showing them a short movie which contains some dialogs and then asked the students to write the indirect version of the dialog. Other types of exercise can also be given more frequently. Drilling the students with some exercises is helpful for the students to be accustomed to transferring direct speech into indirect speech.

(81)

2. Recommendations for the Students of ELESP

As English Language Education Study Program students, who are prepared to be English teachers, the students should master direct and indirect speech because later they should be able to teach about it to their students. It is important for the students to avoid making errors in forming indirect speech.

It is important for them to pay attention to their lecturer when the lecturer is explaining. The lecturer’s explanation is very helpful for students who do not want to read the materials by themselves. Besides, lecturers often give additional helpful information that does not exist in any books. Being active in the classroom can also help students. In this case, being active means willing to ask questions to the lecturer when there is something they do not understand.

Having more practices can also help students in mastering direct and indirect speech. They may find books that contain many exercises about direct and indirect speech. In doing exercises or in reporting what someone says to another person, students should be careful and aware that some parts of the sentence, like the tenses, pronouns, adverb, conjunction, word order, and demonstratives, need to be changed.

3. Recommendations for Other Researchers

Other researchers who are interested in this topic can still explore about this research. Those who are interested in conducting an error analysis about indirect speech can conduct research with different subjects. Besides, other researchers can also use students’ product like their narrative writing rather than using test. Another choice is to conduct research about students’ oral production

(82)

in forming indirect speech. Further research about the causes of errors is also possible. The other researcher can explore the sources of students’ errors directly from the students by conducting an interview or by using questionnaire.

(83)

REFERENCES

Azar, B. S. (1993). Understanding and using English grammar (2nd ed.). Jakarta: Binarupa Aksara.

Best, J. W. (1981). Research in education (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Brown, H. D. (2000).Principles of language learning and teaching(4th ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment principles and classroom practice. New York: Pearson Education.

Celce-Murcia, M. & Larsen Freeman, D. (1983). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course.New York: Newburry House Publisher.

Celce-Murcia, M. & Larsen Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course (2nd ed.). New York: Heinle and Heinle Publisher.

Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. & Barkhuizen, J. (2005). Analyzing learners’ language. New York: Oxford University Press.

Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education(7thed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Norrish, J. (1983).Language learners and their errors. London: Macmillan Press London.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English language teaching. New York: McGraw Hill.

(84)

Thomson, A. J. & Martinet, A. V. (1986). A practical English grammar(4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Yule, G. (2004). Explaining English grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.

(85)

(86)

(87)

(88)

Change the direct sp clause! (Time: 30 min Example:

Mother said, “What a Mother saidthat it 1. “I have something

I told her ____________ 2. The teacher alwa

The teacher alwa 3. “Can I get coffee

My aunt asked 4. “Shut the door, T

She asked Tom _______ 5. Diana exclaimed

Diana exclaimed 6. Michael said, “I h

Michael said _________ 7. “Which team has

Ann asked ___________ 8. “Have you reserve

I asked him __________ 9. “Lend him your

I asked Mary _________ 10. Jane always says,

Jane always excl 11. My teacher said, Appendix 2: The Test

ect speech into indirect speech by completing 30 minutes)

hat a big house it is!”

it was a very big house.

ething to show to you,” I told her.

__________________________________________________ r always asks the students, “What have you learned

r always asks the students __________________________ coffee on the train?” my aunt asked.

sked ______________________________________________ door, Tom,” she said.

Tom _______________________________________ aimed, “What a beautiful dress it is!”

aimed _______________________________________________ id, “I had seen these girls three days ago.”

id __________________________________________________ m has won?” asked Ann.

____________________________________________________ reserved a seat for us?” I asked him.

___________________________________________________ your pen for a moment,” I said to Mary.

__________________________________________________ ys, “What a beautiful girl I am!”

s exclaims ___________________________________________ r said, “The earth is round.”

Name : ____________ Student #:__________ Test

leting the reporting

_____________________ earned today?” _______________________________ ______________ _________________________________________ _______________________ ______________________ __________________________ _____________________ ______________ ________________ ___________ ___________

(89)

My teacher said ________________________________________________ 12. “Where is the ticket office?” asked Mrs. Jones.

Mrs. Jones asked _______________________________________________ 13. “Do you want to buy any second-hand books tomorrow?” Bill asked me.

Bill asked me _________________________________________________ 14. “Don’t watch late-night horror movies,” I warned them.

I warned them _________________________________________________ 15. Lidya said, “How brave you are.”

Lidya said ____________________________________________________ 16. Mr. Garner told the children, “There are seven days in one week.”

Mr. Garner told the children ______________________________________ 17. Dedy asked Dina, “How long had you been waiting for me here?”

Dedy asked Dina _______________________________________________ 18. “Will you watch the football match next week?” she said to me.

She said to me _________________________________________________ 19. “Don’t believe everything you hear,” he warned me.

He warned me _________________________________________________ 20. My teacher said, “What a naughty little girl she is.”

My teacher exclaimed ___________________________________________ 21. Wendy told us, “My father bought a red car two months ago.”

Wendy told us _________________________________________________ 22. Mrs. Brown asked me, “When will you submit this assignment?”

Mrs. Brown asked me ___________________________________________ 23. “Does this train stop in New York?” asked Bill.

Bill asked ____________________________________________________ 24. “Please fill up this form now,” the secretary asked me.

The secretary asked me __________________________________________ 25. She tells me, “How cute you are!”

She tells me __________________________________________________

  

Thank You

  

(90)

Appendix 3: The Answer Key

1. I told her that I had something to show to her.

2. The teacher always asks the students what they have learned that day. 3. My aunt asked me if she could get coffee on the train.

4. She asked Tom to shut the door. 5. Diana said that it was a beautiful dress.

Diana said what a beautiful dress it was.

6. Michael said that he had seen those girls three days before. 7. Ann asked which team had won.

8. I asked him whether he had reserved a seat for us. 9. I asked Marry to lend him her pen for a moment. 10. Jane always says/exclaims that she is a beautiful girl.

Jane always exclaims/says what a beautiful girl she is. 11. My teacher said that the earth is round.

12. Mrs. Jones asked where the ticket office was.

13. Bill asked me if I wanted to buy any second-hand books the next day. 14. I warned them not to watch late-night horror movies.

15. Lidya exclaimed that s/he was brave. Lidya exclaimed how brave s/he was.

16. Mr. Garner told the children that there are seven days in one week. 17. Dedy asked Dina how long she had been waiting for him there.

18. She asked whether I would watch the football match the following week. 19. He warned me not to believe everything I heard.

20. My teacher said that she was a naughty little girl. My teacher said what a naughty little girl she was.

21. Wendy told us that his father bought a nice car two months before. 22. Mrs. Brown asked me when I would submit that assignment. 23. Bill asked if that train stopped in New York.

24. The secretary asked me to fill up that form at that time. 25. She says that I am cute

(91)

(92)

(93)

(94)

(95)

Appendix 5: The Example of the Errors Found in Students’ Answers

No. Items Examples of Students’ Errors

#1 “I have something to show to you,” I told her.

 I told her (that) I had something to show to her.

 I told herthat I have something to show to you.

#6 Michael said, “I had seen these girls three days ago.”

 Michael said (that) he had seen those girls three days before.

 Michael said that he had seen those girls three days ago.

 Michael saidthat he had seen these girls three days ago.

 Michael said if he had been seen those girls three days ago.

#11 My teacher said, “The earth is round.”

 My teacher said(that) the earth is round.

 My teacher saidthat the earth was round.

#16 Mr. Garner told the children, “There are seven days in one week.”

 Mr. Garner told the children (that) there are seven days in one week.

 Mr. Garner told the children that there were seven days in one week.

 Mr. Garner told the childrenif there are 7 days in one week.

#21 Wendy told us, “My father bought a red car two months ago.”

 Wendy told us (that) his father (had) bought a red car two months before.

 Wendy told us that his father had bought a red car two months ago.

 Wendy told usif his father has bought a red car two months before.

 Wendy told us my father had bought a red car two months ago.

#2 The teacher always asks the students, “What have you learned today?”

The teacher always asks the studentswhat they have learned that day.

 The teacher always asks the studentswhat they had learned today.

 The teacher always asks the studentswhat we had learned today.

 The teacher always asks the studentswhat had they learned today.

 The teacher always asks the studentswhether they had learned that day.

#7 “Which team has won?” asked Ann.

 Ann askedwhich team had won.

 Ann askedwhich team has won.

 Ann askedthat the team had won.

(96)

No. Items Examples of Students’ Errors #12 “Where is the ticket office?” asked

Mrs. Jones.

 Mrs. Jones asked where the ticket office was.

 Mrs. Jones askedwhere the ticket office is.

 Mrs. Jones askedwhere was the ticket office.

 Mrs. Jones askedthat where was the ticket office.

#17 Dedy asked Dina, “How long had you been waiting for me here?”

 Dedy asked Dina how long she had been waiting for him there.

 Dedy asked Dina how long she had had waiting for him here.

 Dedy asked Dinathat how long had she being been waiting for him here.

 Dedy asked Dinahow long you had been waiting for me here.

 Dedy asked Dinahow long had you been waiting for me here.

#22 Mrs. Brown asked me, “When will you submit this assignment?”

Mr. Brown asked me when I would submit that assignment.

 Mr. Brown asked me when will I submit this assignment.

 Mr. Brown asked me if I would submit that assignment.

 Mr. Brown asked me when you will submit that assignment.

#3 “Can I get coffee on the train?” my aunt asked.

 My aunt asked if she could get coffee on the train.

 My aunt asked if I could get coffee on the train.

 My aunt asked if she can get coffee on the train.

 My aunt asked could I get coffee on the train.

 My aunt asked to get her a coffee on the train.

#8 “Have you reserved a seat for us?” I asked him.

I asked himif he had reserved a seat for us.

 I asked him if he have reserved a seat for us.

 I asked himif you had reserved a seat for us.

 I asked him had he reserved a seat for us.

#13 “Do you want to buy any second-hand books tomorrow?” Bill asked me.

 Bill asked me if I wanted to buy any second-hand books the next day.

 Bill asked meif I want to buy any second-hand books tomorrow.

 Bill asked me did I want to buy any second-hand books tomorrow.

 Bill asked me that did I want to buy any second-hand books tomorrow.

(97)

No. Items Examples of Students’ Errors #18 “Will you watch the football match

next week?” she said to me.

 She asked me if I would watch the football match the following week.

 She asked me whether I will watch the football match the following week.

 She asked me will you watch the football match the week after this week.

 She asked me if I would watch the football match next week.

#23 “Does this train stop in New York?” asked Bill.

 Bill asked if that train stopped in New York.

 Bill asked whether this train stop in New York.

 Bill asked did that train stopped in New York.

#4 “Shut the door, Tom,” she said.

She asked Tomto shut the door.

 She asked Tomshutted the door.

#9 “Lend him your pen for a moment,” I said to Mary.

I asked Maryto lend him her pen for a moment.

 I asked Mary could she lend me her pen for a moment.

 I asked Mary that she lended a pen to him.

 I asked Maryif she could lend him a pen for a moment.

#14 “Don’t watch late-night horror movies,” I warned them.

I warned themnot to watch late-night horror movies.

 I warned themto not watch late night horror movies.

 I warned themto do not watched late-night horror movies.

 I warned themnot watched late-night horror movies.

 I warned themnot watch late night horror movies.

 I warned themthat not to watch late-night horror movies.

 I warned themdid not to watch late night horror movies.

#19 “Don’t believe everything you hear,” he warned me.

He warned me not to believe everything I heard.

 He warned me to not believe everything I hear.

 He warned me to didn’t believe everything I heard.

 He warned me didn’t believe everything I hear.

 He warned methat do not believe everything I heard.

 He warned me if I didn’t believe everything I hear.

(98)

No. Items Examples of Students’ Errors #24 “Please fill up this form now,” the

secretary asked me.

The secretary asked me to fill up that form then.

 The secretary asked meto fill up this form now.

 The secretary asked me to filled up this form now.

 The secretary asked mefilled up this form then.

#5 Diana exclaimed, “What a beautiful dress it is!”

Dianaexclaimed (that) the dress was beautiful.

Diana excaimedwhat a beautiful dress it was.

 Diana exclaimedthat the dress is beautiful.

 Diana exclaimedwhether the dress was beautiful.

#10 Jane always says, “What a beautiful girl I am!”

Jane always saysthat she is beautiful.

Jane always sayswhat a beautiful girl she is.

 Jane always saysthat she was a beautiful girl.

 Jane always sayswhat a beautiful girl I am.

 Jane always saysthat I was beautiful.

#15 Lidya said to me, “How brave you are.”

Lidya said to me that I was brave.

Lidya said to me how brave I was.

 Lidya saidif I was brave.

 Lidya saidthat you are brave.

#20 My teacher said, “What a naughty little girl she is.”

My teacher exclaimed (that) she was a naughty little girl.

My teacher said what a naughty little girl she was.

 My teacher exclaimedthat she is a naughty little girl.

 My teacher exclaimedwhat a naughty little girl is she.

#25 She tells me, “How cute you are!”

She tells methat I am cute.

She exclaimedhow cute I am.

 She tells methat I was cute.

(99)

Appendix 6: The Students’ Scores and the Reliability of the Test for Class B Test

Takers

ITEM NUMBER SCORE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 9

2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 6

3 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 17

4 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 19

5 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 13

6 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 16

7 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 10

8 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 15

9 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 10

10 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 17

11 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 18

12 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 17

13 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10

14 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7

15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 20

16 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 16

17 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 15

(100)

Test Takers

ITEM NUMBER SCORE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

19 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 16

20 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 11

21 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 20

22 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 18

23 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 13

24 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 18

25 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 10

26 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 23

27 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 22

28 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 20

29 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 15

30 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 12

31 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 10

32 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 21

33 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 20

34 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 13

35 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12

TOTAL 527

MEAN 15.057

STANDARD DEVIATION 4.4321 RELIABILITY (KR21) 0.7241

(101)

Appendix 7: The Students’ Scores and the Reliability of the Test for Class D

Test Takers

ITEM NUMBER SCORE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 10

2 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 15

3 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 13

4 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 17

5 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 17

6 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 20

7 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 11

8 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 19

9 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 10

10 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 20

11 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 16

12 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 12

13 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 18

14 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 10

15 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 11

(102)

Test Takers

ITEM NUMBER SCORE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

17 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 17

18 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 16

19 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 16

20 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 19

21 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 22

22 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 12

23 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 22

24 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 16

25 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 11

26 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 10

27 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7

28 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 21

29 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 13

30 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 19

31 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

TOTAL 463

MEAN 14.93548

STANDARD DEVIATION 4.39648 RELIABILITY (KR21) 0.717632

Errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of English Languange Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.

ERRORS

AMONG

OF ENGLISH LA

OF SA

RORS IN FORMING INDIRECT SPEEC

ONG THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDEN

SH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY P

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

SPEECH

STUDENTS

DY PROGRAM

SITY

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

IN FORMING INDIRECT SPEECII

AMONG THE

SEMESTER STUDENTS

OF ENGLISH

EDUCATION

STUDY

PROGRAM

OF SANATA DIIARMA

T]NTVERSITY

October2012

ffe

T-#"ro

4f}*"i"u*LJ1u

$'st"@r:

A

ffryr.84*4\

,&

!f

-*b

L**a*""*g*

IN FORMING INDIRECT

SPEECH

AMONG THE

SEMESTER STUDENTS

OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION

STUDY

PROGRAM

OF SANATA DHARMA

UNIVERSITY

STATEMENT

OF WORK'S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declare that this thesis,

l/

/v/

/

Yulia

ILMIAH

Nama

Mahasiswa : 081214069

di Internet atau media

ijin dari saya maupun

It

'/

/(M

  

Thank You

  

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

The English sound changes among Javanese students of the English language education study program of Sanata Dharma University.

A set of English assessment for fourth semester students of primary school teacher education study program of Sanata Dharma University.

Passive voice mastery of the second semester students of English Language Education Study Program in Sanata Dharma University.

Erroneous verb phrases in the speech of microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.

The mastery of English phrasal verbs among the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.

A study on the mastery of preposition of place at, in and on among the first semester students of English Language Education Study Program Of Sanata Dharma University.

A study of word-order errors in noun phrase constructions in the first semester students` writing at the english language education program of Sanata Dharma University.

The Strategy of politeness among the ninth semester students of the English language education study program, Sanata Dharma University.

The mastery of English phrasal verbs among the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University

Erroneous verb phrases in the speech of microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University - USD Repository

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan

4f}"i"uLJ1u

L**a""g*