Errors in writing narrative texts made by the eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
Purnamasari, Ervina Denny Kusuma. 2013. Errors in Writing Narrative Texts
Made by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: English
Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University.
The eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta had a chance to learn
and write narrative texts. They had difficulties in writing the texts, which was
indicated by their grammatical errors in their writing. Moreover, the students
were supposed to write good narrative texts. Thus, considering the students’
difficulties in writing, the researcher conducted this study, to analyze the
students’ errors in their narrative texts. This study was to help the students not to
make the errors anymore.
This study addressed three problems: (1) What errors do the eighth grade
students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta make in writing narrative texts based on the
surface strategy taxonomy theory? (2) What errors are mostly made by the eighth
grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts based on the
surface strategy taxonomy theory? (3) What are the factors causing the errors
done by the eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative
texts? In order to solve the problems, the researcher employed theories of errors
based on surface strategy taxonomy and theory of factors of errors.
This study employed qualitative research involving document analysis
and qualitative survey as the methods. The researcher used the students’ narrative
texts as the documents to be analyzed and conducted interviews with six students
and a teacher as the survey. The researcher employed purposive sampling to
choose the subjects.
The result indicated that four major types of errors based on surface
strategy taxonomy were found in the students’ narrative texts. The first type,
omission, dealt with the omission of grammatical morpheme. The second type
was addition encompassing double marking and simple addition. The third type,
misformation, was classified in archi/alternating form, while misordering, the
other type of error, was indicated by misplaces of auxiliaries in simple and
embedded questions, and an adverb. The mostly identified errors in the students’
writing were the omission type, occurring 63 times. Moreover, the errors
occurred because there was an influence of Bahasa Indonesia in writing the
narrative texts, the confusion of implementing grammar, and the lack of practice
in writing the texts. In addition, the students made errors because of the difficult
materials, in this case was grammar, and the teacher himself.
Keywords: errors, writing, narrative texts, factors of errors, error analysis.
vii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
Purnamasari, Ervina Denny Kusuma. 2013. Errors in Writing Narrative Texts
Made by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta:
Progam Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma
Murid kelas delapan SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, diberi kesempatan untuk
belajar dan menulis teks naratif. Dalam menulis, murid masih menghadapi
kesulitan pada pola kalimat. Melihat kesulitan tersebut, peneliti bertujuan
melakukan penelitian yakni menganalisa kesulitan dalam menulis teks naratif
yang diharapkan bisa membantu murid untuk tidak melakukan kesalahan lagi
dalam menulis.
Penelitian ini terdiri dari tiga rumusan masalah: (1) Kesalahan apa yang
dibuat oleh murid kelas depalan SMPN 8 Yogyakarta dalam menulis teks naratif
berdasarkan teori surface strategy taxonomy? (2) Kesalahan apa yang sering
terjadi dalam menulis teks naratif yang dibuat oleh murid kelas delapan SMPN 8
Yogyakarta berdasarkan teori surface strategy taxonomy? (3) Faktor apa yang
membuat murid melakukan kesalahan dalam menulis teks naratif? Ketiga
rumusan masalah tersebut akan dijawab dengan menggunakan teori tentang
kesalahan berdasarkan surface strategy taxonomy dan faktor penyebab
kesalahan.
Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif yang menggunakan metode
document analysis, dengan teks naratif sebagai dokumen yang dianalisa dan
qualitative survey dengan melakukan wawancara kepada enam murid beserta
guru bahasa Inggris. Dalam pemilihan responden, peneliti menggunakan
sampling purposive.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tipe kesalahan berdasarkan surface
strategy taxonomy ditemukan dalam teks narratif. Pertama, tipe omission,
dideskripsikan dengan omission of grammatical morpheme. Tipe addition
ditunjukkan dengan adanya double marking dan simple addition. Misformation,
yang ditunjukan dengan archi/alternating form, sedangkan tipe misordering
ditunjukkan dengan misplaces of auxiliaries in simple and embedded questions,
dan an adverb. Dari keempat tipe tersebut, tipe omission merupakan tipe yang
sering terjadi, dengan jumlah 63 kesalahan. Kesalahan- kesalahan tersebut
disebabkan oleh adanya pengaruh bahasa Indonesia, sulitnya mempelajari pola
kalimat bahasa Inggris, dan kurangnya latihan menulis. Di samping itu, guru
juga menjadi alasan mengapa murid melakukan kesalahan tersebut.
Kata Kunci: errors, writing, narrative texts, factors of errors, error analysis.
viii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ERRORS IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS MADE
BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS
OF SMPN 8 YOGYAKARTA
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
E. Denny Kusuma Purnamasari
Student Number: 091214127
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
2013
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ERRORS IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS MADE
BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS
OF SMPN 8 YOGYAKARTA
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
E. Denny Kusuma Purnamasari
Student Number: 091214127
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
2013
i
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
iii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
Dedicated to
Allah SWT
My lovely parents, Joseph Haryadi and Salmi S.Pd
My lovely brothers, Leo and Tanto and my
lovely sister-in-law, Laksmi
My lovely boyfriend, Wahyu Prasetyo Susilo
My lovely pet, Chivas
When life gives you a hundred reasons to cry, show life
that you have a thousand reasons to smile
(Borisando Sayoga)
iv
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
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, 9th October 2013
The Writer
E. Denny Kusuma Purnamasari
091214127
v
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama
: E. Denny Kusuma Purnamasari
Nomor Mahasiswa : 091214127
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
ERRORS IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS MADE
BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS
OF SMPN 8 YOGYAKARTA
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan
dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data,
mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain
untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan
royaliti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada Tanggal: 9 Oktober 2013
Yang menyatakan
E. Denny Kusuma Purnama Sari
vi
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
Purnamasari, Ervina Denny Kusuma. 2013. Errors in Writing Narrative Texts Made
by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: English
Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University.
The eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta had a chance to learn and
write narrative texts. They had difficulties in writing the texts, which was indicated
by their grammatical errors in their writing. Moreover, the students were supposed to
write good narrative texts. Thus, considering the students’ difficulties in writing, the
researcher conducted this study, to analyze the students’ errors in their narrative
texts. This study was to help the students not to make the errors anymore.
This study addressed three problems: (1) What errors do the eighth grade
students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta make in writing narrative texts based on the surface
strategy taxonomy theory? (2) What errors are mostly made by the eighth grade
students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts based on the surface
strategy taxonomy theory? (3) What are the factors causing the errors done by the
eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts? In order to
solve the problems, the researcher employed theories of errors based on surface
strategy taxonomy and theory of factors of errors.
This study employed qualitative research involving document analysis and
qualitative survey as the methods. The researcher used the students’ narrative texts
as the documents to be analyzed and conducted interviews with six students and a
teacher as the survey. The researcher employed purposive sampling to choose the
subjects.
The result indicated that four major types of errors based on surface strategy
taxonomy were found in the students’ narrative texts. The first type, omission, dealt
with the omission of grammatical morpheme. The second type was addition
encompassing double marking and simple addition. The third type, misformation,
was classified in archi/alternating form, while misordering, the other type of error,
was indicated by misplaces of auxiliaries in simple and embedded questions, and an
adverb. The mostly identified errors in the students’ writing were the omission type,
occurring 63 times. Moreover, the errors occurred because of an influence of Bahasa
Indonesia in writing the narrative texts, the confusion of implementing grammar, and
the lack of practice in writing the texts. In addition, the students made errors because
of the difficult materials, in this case was grammar, and the teacher himself.
Keywords: errors, writing, narrative texts, factors of errors, error analysis.
vii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
Purnamasari, Ervina Denny Kusuma. 2013. Errors in Writing Narrative Texts Made
by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Progam
Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma
Murid kelas delapan SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, diberi kesempatan untuk belajar
dan menulis teks naratif. Dalam menulis, murid masih menghadapi kesulitan pada
pola kalimat. Melihat kesulitan tersebut, peneliti bertujuan melakukan penelitian
yakni menganalisa kesulitan dalam menulis teks naratif yang diharapkan bisa
membantu murid untuk tidak melakukan kesalahan lagi dalam menulis.
Penelitian ini terdiri dari tiga rumusan masalah: (1) Kesalahan apa yang
dibuat oleh murid kelas depalan SMPN 8 Yogyakarta dalam menulis teks naratif
berdasarkan teori surface strategy taxonomy? (2) Kesalahan apa yang sering terjadi
dalam menulis teks naratif yang dibuat oleh murid kelas delapan SMPN 8
Yogyakarta berdasarkan teori surface strategy taxonomy? (3) Faktor apa yang
membuat murid melakukan kesalahan dalam menulis teks naratif? Ketiga rumusan
masalah tersebut akan dijawab dengan menggunakan teori tentang kesalahan
berdasarkan surface strategy taxonomy dan faktor penyebab kesalahan.
Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif yang menggunakan metode
document analysis, dengan teks naratif sebagai dokumen yang dianalisa dan
qualitative survey dengan melakukan wawancara kepada enam murid beserta guru
bahasa Inggris. Dalam pemilihan responden, peneliti menggunakan sampling
purposive.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tipe kesalahan berdasarkan surface
strategy taxonomy ditemukan dalam teks narratif. Pertama, tipe omission,
dideskripsikan dengan omission of grammatical morpheme. Tipe addition
ditunjukkan dengan adanya double marking dan simple addition. Misformation,
yang ditunjukan dengan archi/alternating form, sedangkan tipe misordering
ditunjukkan dengan misplaces of auxiliaries in simple and embedded questions, dan
an adverb. Dari keempat tipe tersebut, tipe omission merupakan tipe yang sering
terjadi, dengan jumlah 63 kesalahan. Kesalahan- kesalahan tersebut disebabkan
oleh adanya pengaruh bahasa Indonesia, sulitnya mempelajari pola kalimat bahasa
Inggris, dan kurangnya latihan menulis. Di samping itu, guru juga menjadi alasan
mengapa murid melakukan kesalahan tersebut.
Kata Kunci: errors, writing, narrative texts, factors of errors, error analysis.
viii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to thank Allah SWT. I really thank for his blessing
and mercy, which take me to the end of my meaningful time in finishing this thesis. I
realize that I am nothing without Allah SWT.
I would also express my gratitude to my major advisor, Dr. Retno Muljani,
M.Pd. I can finish this thesis well through her guidance. She always gives me good
advice and support during the process of this thesis.
My deepest appreciation goes to the Headmaster of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, H.
Suharno, S.Pd., S.Pd. T., M.Pd., for giving me permission to conduct this research
in SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. I would like to thank the English teacher of VIII/6,
Haryanto, S.Pd. MM., who has provided me the students’ narrative texts as the data
of this study. My deepest appreciation also goes to my respondents of this study, the
students of VIII/6.
I would like to thank my lovely parents, Joseph Haryadi and Salmi S.Pd.
They have given me warm smiles, hugs, patience, love, great encouragement, and
never ending prayers so that I can finish this thesis well. Moreover, I would like to
express my great gratitude to my lovely elder brother, Leo, my lovely younger
brother, Tanto, and my lovely sister-in-law, Laksmi for their support so that I can
finish this masterpiece.
My special gratitude and sincere appreciation also go to my lovely boyfriend,
Mas Ayuk. His love, patience, prayer and support encourage me to finish this thesis
ix
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
well. Furthermore, he always made me strong to face many problems in finishing this
thesis.
I would also like to appreciate my lovely friends, Ita, Helen, Sekar, Pipit,
Berta, Niken, Frisca, Leo, Bruder Markus, and Sayu. Their precious time given to
me encouraged me to finish this thesis happily. Furthermore, I would also like to
thank Sister Margareth, FCJ, Sesi, Sari, Wili, and Devi as my proofreaders.
Finally, I would dedicate my gratitude to those whose names I cannot
mention. I really thank for their prayers and their encouragement given to me to finish
this thesis.
E. Denny Kusuma Purnama Sari
x
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE …………………………………………………………...…
i
APPROVAL PAGES ...…………………………………………………...
ii
DEDICATION PAGE…………………………………………………......
iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY…………………………….
v
PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ……………………….........
vi
ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………..
vii
ABSTRAK …………………………………………………………………..
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ……………………………………………….
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………….
xi
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………
xv
LIST OF APPENDICES …………………………………………………
x vi
CHAPTER l. INTRODUCTION
A.
Research Background ………………………………
1
B.
Research Problems ………………………………..
4
C.
Problem Limitation …………………………………
5
D.
Research Objectives ………………………………
5
E.
Research Benefits …………………………………..
6
F.
Definition of Terms ………………………………….
7
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Theoretical description …………………………………
9
1. Theory of Errors …………………………..………
9
2. Types of Error .……………………………………
10
3. Factor Causing Errors ……………………………….
14
4. Errors Analysis …………………………………….
16
xi
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
5. Theory of Writing ………………………………….
17
6. Narrative Texts …………………………………….
19
7. Curriculum ………………………………………..
20
B. Theoretical Framework ……………………………….
21
CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY
A. Research Method ……………………………………...
23
B. Research Setting ………………………………………
25
C. Research Subjects …..………………..……………….
26
D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique ..
27
E. Data Analysis Technique …………………………….
28
F. Research Procedure …………………………………..
33
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Errors Made by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta in Writing Narrative Texts …………….
35
1. Omission Type …………………………………..
36
2. Addition Type …………………………………..
39
3. Misformation Type ……………………………..
41
4. Misordering Type ………………………………
42
B. The Most Frequently Errors Made by the Students of Grade
Eighth of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in Writing Narrative Texts
………………………………………………………
44
C. Factors Causing Errors Made by the Students in Writing
Narrative Texts ……………………………………..
46
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Conclusions ………………………………………….
x ii
53
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
B. Recommendations …………………………………..
55
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………
56
APPENDICES …………………………………………………………
60
xiii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Tables
3.1.1 Classification of Omission of Major Constituents………………………………
29
3.1.2 Classification of Omission of Grammatical Morpheme…………………….. …
29
3.1.3 The Classification of Double Marking………………………………………….
30
3.1.4 The Classification of Simple Addition …………………………………………
30
3.1.5 Classification of Overregularization ………………………………………….
31
3.1.6 Classification of Archi/alternating form ………………………………………
31
3.1.7 Classification of Misordering Errors …………………………………..
31
3.2 The Most Frequently Errors Made by the Students ……………………………
32
4.1.1 Classification of Omission of Grammatical Morpheme …………………….
37
4.1.2 Classification of Double Marking ………………………………………
39
4.1.2 Classification of Simple Addition ……………………………………….
40
4.1.5 Classification of Archi/Alternating Form ……………………………………..
41
4.1.6 Classification of Misordering ………………………………………………….
43
4.2 The Number of the Major Types of Error……………………………………….
45
x iv
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
APPENDIX 1. A Permission Letter for Research Given to the
Headmaster of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta ………………………….
61
APPENDIX 2. A Permission Letter for Research Given to the Chairperson of
Permission Department ………………………………………
APPENDIX 3. A Confirmation Letter …………………………………………
62
63
APPENDIX 4. A Research Statement …………………………………………… 64
APPENDIX 5. The Examples of Students’ Narrative Texts ………………….
65
APPENDIX 6. Errors Found in the Students’ Narrative Texts ………………..
74
APPENDIX 7. Interview Guidelines ………..……………………………. ….
79
APPENDIX 8. Interview Transcripts …………………………………………..
81
APPENDIX 9. Other Findings ………………………………………………...
89
APPENDIX 10. People’s Opinions about SMPN 8 Yogyakarta ……………….
91
xv
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the introduction of this study. It consists of six parts,
namely the research background, research problems, problem limitation, research
objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms which will be used in this
study.
A.
Research Background
English, as an international language, is taught as one of the lessons to
junior high school in Indonesia, for instance in SMPN 8 Yogyakarta as the focus of
this study. The students of grades seven up to nine have to study English.
Furthermore, it is necessary for the students to study English well since it is included
in their final examination.
Students learn some genres of texts in an English lesson, one of them is
narrative texts as the focus of this study. According to Abbott (2002), narrative is the
representation of an event (p. 12). It means that narrative normally tells something
happening in the past. Furthermore, Wardiman, Jahur, and Djumas (2008) state that
a narrative text is a story to amuse people (p. 93). In this study, the researcher claims
that a narrative text is a text telling a story which happened in the past to amuse
readers.
1
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
2
This study focuses on narrative texts for their importance to study. Based on
Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan/KTSP, Standar Kompetensi/SK no 12 and
Kompetensi Dasar/KD no 12.2, narrative texts have to be given in grades eight and
nine. Furthermore, according to the English teacher of VIII/6 of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta, the eighth grade students are supposed to be able to compose narrative
texts well both in speaking and writing skills in semester two. Thus, it is significant
for the students to study narrative texts well.
Based on the English syllabus for VIII/6 of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, the
students will study narrative texts through four skills, namely reading, speaking,
listening, and writing. This study focuses on the writing skill especially writing
narrative texts due to several reasons. The first reason is based on a result of an
unintentionally conversation between the researcher and the students of VIII/6 which
indicates that some students still have difficulties in writing since there are many
tenses to learn. The English teacher of VIII/6 said that there were some students who
had difficulties in implementing tenses in writing texts. However, after the
researcher read the students’ writing, the researcher not only found errors in tenses
but the researcher also discovered some grammatical errors made by the students
from class VIII/6 in writing recount texts and narrative texts. Considering those
facts, the researcher becomes interested in knowing further whether the students still
have difficulties in using grammar in writing narrative texts or not.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
3
Actually, there have been studies of analyzing errors in writing texts. One of
the studies had been conducted by Indriawati (2008) who focused on narrative texts.
She chose SMAN 2 Klaten as the setting of the study. The focus of her study was
textual features in writing the narrative texts. The study revealed how well the
students wrote the narrative texts using generic structure and how well simple past
tense they had in their narrative texts was. Another research was conducted by
Anggraheni (2008) who analyzed errors in recount texts done by the students of
SMP Kanisius. The errors she analyzed dealt with morphology, syntax, and
taxonomy. The last researcher, Hanafitria (2009), analyzed students’ errors in
writing descriptive texts. The errors she focused on were spelling, vocabulary, word
class, sentence structure, and punctuation.
The focus of this study is different from the previous researches. In this
study, the researcher focuses more on errors made by the eighth grade students of
SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in creating narrative texts based on surface strategy taxonomy,
which deals with students’ cognitive ability. According to Dulay, Burt, and Khrasen
(1982), errors of this type are characterized by omission of morphemes, addition of
an item which should not appear in an utterance, misordering, and misformation (p.
150). Moreover, Dulay, et al. (1982) claim that identifying errors from surface
strategy taxonomy gives great promises for the researchers to know the students’
cognitive processes in reconstructing the new language (p. 150). Thus, the researcher
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
4
employs surface strategy taxonomy to know the students’ cognitive ability in
reconstructing English through writing narrative texts.
In addition, in this study, the researcher chose SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, which
according to five of five people is considered as a famous school in Yogyakarta. The
students studying in this school are excellent and well selected. Furthermore, SMPN
8 is considered as an international school. Thus, it is quite challenging to know
whether the students from a well-known school have difficulties or not in writing
narrative texts.
B. Research Problems
The researcher addresses three research problems related to this study. The
research problems are stated as follows:
1.
What errors do the eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta make in
writing narrative texts based on the surface strategy taxonomy theory?
2.
What errors are mostly made by the eighth grade students of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts based on the surface strategy taxonomy
theory?
3.
What are the factors causing errors done by the eighth grade students of SMPN
8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts?
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
5
C. Problem Limitation
This study focuses on revealing errors in writing narrative texts done by the
students of VIII/6 of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. The errors that the researcher deals with
are identified by using the surface strategy taxonomy theory. Dulay et al. (1982)
propose that errors based on surface strategy taxonomy are characterized by
omission of morphemes, addition of an item which should not appear in an
utterance, misordering, and misformation (p. 151). Thus, the researcher focuses on
errors based on those types (omission, addition, misformation, and misordering).
This study focuses on one class, namely VIII/6 due to two reasons. The first
reason is that the researcher has found errors made by the students of that class on
their writing. Furthermore, this class is the only class which has an opportunity to
write narrative texts in semester two asked by their teacher.
Due to time limitation, the researcher has one chance to collect data for the
first and second research problems. Further, the researcher can only interview six
students to discover factors causing errors as the answer to the third research
problem.
D. Research Objectives
In this study, the researcher provides the aims of this study. The following
are the objectives of this study:
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
6
1. To know what errors made by the students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing
narrative texts.
2. To identify the errors mostly made by the students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in
writing narrative texts.
3. To discover the underlying reasons of making errors in composing narrative
texts.
E. Research Benefits
In this study, the researcher provides research benefits for the English
teacher of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta and also the eighth grade students of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta. The research benefits are presented as follows:
1.
English Teacher of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta
By studying errors made by the students of VIII/6 of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in
writing narrative texts, the English teacher can know the students’ difficulties in
their writing. Moreover, since the errors will be categorized into some types, the
teacher will know the most difficult area faced by the students in writing narrative
texts. Thus, it enables the teacher to pay attention more to the parts in which the
errors mostly occur.
2.
Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta
By being shown the errors made by the students in writing narrative texts,
the students will know their erroneous in their writing. Furthermore, the students can
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
7
correct their errors in their writing, which enables them to study the parts in which
they make the errors. Thus, it is expected that the students will not make errors
anymore in composing other narrative texts after knowing their errors.
F.
Definition of Terms
The researcher provides some definitions of terms related to this study.
They are:
1.
Error
According to Chomsky (1965), errors are the result of the lack of knowledge
(as cited in Dulay et al., 1982, p. 139). The theory from Chomsky is supported by
Erdogan (2005) saying, “an error is the use of a linguistic item in a way that a fluent
or native speaker of the language regards it as showing faulty or incomplete learning
(p. 263).” It means that errors happen because the learners have not mastered the
materials well due to the faulty or incomplete learning. In line with Chomsky and
Erdogan, errors in this study deal with the students’ difficulties in writing narrative
texts.
2. Writing
Zimmeerman and Rodrigues (1992) claim that writing is a way of sharing
ideas with others (p. 4). Zamel (1983) states that writing is a process through which
students can explore and discover their thoughts, constructing meaning and assessing
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
8
it at the same time,” (as cited in Ho, 2006, p. 2). In this study, writing deals with
discovering students’ thoughts in writing narrative texts.
3.
Narrative Text
Abbott (2002) points out that narrative is the representation of an event (p.
12). Priyana, Irjayanti, and Renitasari (2008) state that narrative texts is a story
telling about events dealing with problems and having unexpected outcomes (p.
164). In line with Priyana et al. and Abbott, narrative texts in this study refer to a
story which happened in the past.
4. Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta
The students in this study refer to the eighth grade students of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta sitting in VIII/6 as the subjects of this study. There are 17 female and 13
male students. They have an opportunity to study narrative texts and construct them
in semester two. Thus, the researcher aims to examine errors in narrative texts
written by the students of VIII/6 of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter provides some theories which support this study. It consists of
two parts, namely theoretical description and theoretical framework.
A. Theoretical Description
This part describes the theories of errors, writing, and narrative texts. In
addition, this part reveals curriculum briefly.
1.
Theory of Errors
Since English is a foreign language in Indonesia, the students who study it
might find difficulties in using it. Dulay et al. (1982) agree that people certainly
make errors in studying language (p. 138). Moreover, Ellis (1997) says that errors
will always occur if the students do not understand what the correct forms are (p.
18). It means that the learners might continually make errors before they know the
correct form of the target language.
Errors happen because the learners have not mastered the lesson well due to
the faulty or incomplete learning. Erdogan (2005) says, “an error is the use of
linguistic item in a way that a fluent or native speaker of the language regards it as
showing faulty or incomplete learning” (p. 263). Moreover, according to Chomsky
(1965), errors are the result of the lack of knowledge (as cited in Dulay et al. 1982,
9
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
10
p. 139). Ellis (1997) states that errors happen because the students do not know what
the correct ones are (p. 17). Erdogan (2005) provides an example of an error in the
following sentence “A strange thing *happen to me yesterday” (p. 264). The
sentence should be “A strange thing happened to me yesterday.”
According to Ellis (1997) errors are different from mistakes because:
“Errors reflect gaps in a learner’s knowledge; they occur because the students
do not know the correct one. Mistakes reflect occasional lapses in
performance; they occur because, in a particular instance, the learner is unable
to perform what he or she knows” (p. 17).
The statements from Ellis describe the differences between errors and
mistakes. Errors are affected by the students’ limited knowledge. The students have
not mastered the materials well and they do not know the correct ones. Mistakes, on
the other hand, happen when the student fails to perform what he or she actually
knows. Here are the examples of errors and mistakes provided by Ellis (1997):
Errors:
A student said, “A man and a little boy *was watching him.”
Mistakes:
In the beginning of a narrative a student said, “The big of them contained a
snake.” However, in the final sentence, he said, “The basket *contain a snake”
(p. 16).
2. Types of Errors
There are four major types of errors proposed by Dulay et al. (1982),
namely linguistics category taxonomy, surface strategy taxonomy, comparative
taxonomy, and communicative effect taxonomy. Dulay et al. (1982) state that
linguistics category taxonomy deals with classifying errors according to either or
both the language components or the particular linguistic constituent (p. 146).
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
11
Surface strategy taxonomy highlights the ways surface structures are altered.
Comparative taxonomy deals with the classification of errors based on comparison
between the structure of L2 errors and certain other types of construction.
Communicative effect taxonomy deals with errors from the perspective of their
effect on the listener or reader. However, in this study, the researcher focuses on
errors based on surface strategy taxonomy because Dulay et al. (1985) declare that it
holds great promise for researchers concerning with identifying cognitive processes
that underlie the learner’s reconstruction of the new language (p. 150).
Ellis (1997) provides types of errors such as omission, misformation, and
misordering. Omission refers to the missing of an item which should be provided in
an utterance. Misinformation refers to the using of one grammatical form to another
grammatical form. Misordering, on the other hand, is putting words in an utterance
incorrectly (p. 18).
In comparison with Dulay et al. Ellis’ theory about types of errors is similar
in some aspects with Dulay’s et al. theory. However, Dulay et al. group their types
of errors (omission, addition, misinformation, and misordering) into surface strategy
taxonomy. Dulay et al. (1982) state, “analyzing errors from surface strategy
taxonomy concerns with identifying cognitive processes that underlie the learner’s
reconstruction of the new language” (p. 150). Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) clarify
that surface strategy taxonomy shows that the learners carry out their cognitive
comparison by noticing elements in their utterances (p. 61). It means that surface
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
12
strategy taxonomy deals with the students’ cognitive processes in understanding and
implementing the target language.
The following types of errors are the classifications of errors based on the
surface strategy taxonomy theory proposed by Dulay et al. (1982).
a.
Omission
An omission occurs because there is a missing item which should be
provided in an utterance. The omission can be indicated by the lack of the major
constituent in the utterance like a head noun, a subject, a main verb, and a direct
object, for instance, “Don’t give *__to me.” The sentence does not have an object.
Thus, the utterance should be “Don’t give it to me.” In addition, the lack of
grammatical morpheme such as the omissions of a preposition, an article, a short
plural, a long plural, an auxiliary, a copula, a progressive form, an infinitive, a
regular and irregular past tense verb, and a third person singular form also indicate
kinds of omission, for example, Leo *buy *__book. The sentence is incorrect
because it is lack of morphemes “s” and “a”. It should be “Leo buys a book.”
b. Addition
An addition shows an excess of an unnecessary item in an utterance. The
addition itself is divided into three classifications: double marking, regularization,
and simple addition. Double marking refers to two items in the same feature. Double
marking can be indicated by the excess of present indicative verbs, regular past and
irregular past tense verbs, and indirect objects, for example, “She didn’t *drank a
cup of tea” which should be “she did not drink a cup of tea.” Regularization refers to
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
13
a marker put in items which do not need the marker, for example, eated, deers, and
sheeps. Simple addition, on the other hand, occurs because of the use of an item
which should not appear in an utterance. It can be indicated by an unnecessary
preposition, an articles and a third person singular form existing in a sentence, for
example, “*a this”.
c. Misformation
Misformation is another kind of errors. It is indicated by the wrong form of
a morpheme or a structure, for example, “The dog *eated the chicken.”
Misinformation is divided into three classifications: regularization errors, archiforms, and alternating forms. Regularization occurs if the learners use a regular
marker to mark an irregular one. It can be described in the wrong form of a reflexive
pronoun, a regular past tense verb, and a third person singular form, for example “I
*drinked.” Drink is an irregular verb which does not need a suffix to make it into a
past tense verb. The word drink should be “drank. “ Archi-forms are the use of a
determiner for a thing to refer to entire things. For example, “*that dogs” which
should be those dogs. According to Dulay et al. (1982), “the use of archi-forms often
gives a way to apparently fairly free alternation of various members of class with
each other” (p. 161). Archi/alternating form can be indicated by the wrong form of
an auxiliary, a preposition, a subject pronoun, a possessive pronoun, and a
demonstrative, for example, “I am waiting *of you” which should be “I am waiting
for you.”
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
14
d. Misordering
Misordering, the other type of errors occurs when the learners place a
morpheme or a group of morphemes in an incorrect place. It can be indicated by a
wrong place of an auxiliary in simple and embedded questions, and an adverb, for
example, he *everyday is handsome. The word everyday is not in an appropriate
place. It should be placed in the beginning or the end of the sentence. Thus, the
correct sentence should be “he is handsome everyday.”
Ellis (1997) declares that types of errors can help the researcher diagnose
what errors the learners make (p. 18). Thus, those types of errors proposed by Dulay
et al. enable the researcher to know what type of errors the eighth grade students of
SMPN 8 Yogyakarta make. Besides, the researcher can help the teacher find which
parts of the materials in which the students still have difficulties.
3. Factors Causing Errors
Students make errors because of some factors. The researcher claims the
same causes of errors with a study of textual features of the narrative text by
Indrayati (2008). The causes of errors that the researcher focuses on are taken from
Brown. The factors causing errors proposed by Brown (1987) are interlingual
transfer, intralingual transfer, context of learning and communication strategies (p.
224).
Brown (1987) proposes that interlingual transfer is similar with
interferences (p. 177). Richard (1971) clarifies that interference errors deal with the
habitually in using the first language affects the use of the second language (as cited
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
15
in Ellis, 2008, p. 53). It means that the existence of the first language can influence
the students in using the target language.
Brown (1987) claims that intralingual transfer is the major factor in the
second language learning (p. 178). Richard (1971) proposes that intralingual transfer
concerns with problems in generalization, incomplete application of rules and learn
the rule of language unsuccessfully (as cited in Ellis, 2008, p. 53). It means that
intralingual transfer indicates that in implementing the rule of the target language,
the students might simply make overgeneralization.
According to Brown (1987), context refers to the collaboration between the
classroom with its teacher and materials in the case of school learning. Furthermore,
in a classroom context, the teacher and the textbook can lead the learner to make
faulty hypotheses about the language (p. 179). It means that the possible causes
which make the students deliver incorrect hypotheses of the target language are the
teacher itself and the textbook.
Faerch and Kasper (1983a) state that a communication strategy deals with
conscious plans for solving what to an individual presents itself as a problem in
reaching a particular communicative goal (as cited in Brown, 2000, p. 180). It means
that a communication strategy is used to overcome the individuals’ problems to
convey their meanings.
According to Tarone (1981) communication strategies are classified into
some classifications as follow. The first classification is paraphrase consisting of
approximation, word coinage, and circumlocution. Approximation is the use of
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
16
single target language that the learner knows is not correct. Word coinage refers to
making a new word to communicate a desired concept. Circumlocution, on the other
hand, is describing the characteristics of the object instead of using the appropriate
target language. The second classification is borrowing consisting of literal
translation or translating word by word and language switch or using the native
language without bothering to translate it. The third classification is appeal for
assistance consisting of mime referring to the using of nonverbal strategies in a place
of a lexical item. The last classification is avoidance consisting of topic of avoidance
referring to the learner trying not to talk about concepts for which the target
language is not known and message abandonment or the learners begin to talk about
concepts but is unable to continue (p. 286).
Erdogan (2005) proposes factors of errors which support Brown’s
explanations about sources of errors, namely interlingual transfer and intralingual
transfer. Erdogan points out that interlingual transfer occurs because of an influence
from the first language in using the target language. Intralingual transfer, on the
other hand, deals with the influence of one target language item upon another (p.
265).
4. Error Analysis
Selinker and Gass (2001) state, “error analysis is a type of linguistics
analysis concerning with errors done by learners (p. 79).” Dulay et al. (1982) claim
that error analysis is observing students’ errors (p. 138). In line with Selinker and
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
17
Gass and Dulay et al. in this study, error analysis is the study of errors made by the
eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts.
Erdogan (2005) states, “error analysis deals with the learners’ performance
in terms of the cognitive processes they make use of in recognizing or coding the
input they receive from the target language” (p. 263). What Erdogan means is that
error analysis deals with the students’ cognitive ability in implementing what they
have got. The researcher aims to analyze errors made by the eighth grade students of
SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts to know their mastery in composing
narrative texts.
Dulay et al. (1982) say that studying students’ errors has aims which are to
give data to show to the teachers and curriculum developers about the students’
difficulties in some parts and to show what type of errors the students make (p. 138).
The purpose of error analysis proposed by Dulay et al. is related to the objective of
this study which is to show errors made by the students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in
writing narrative texts, which can help the teacher to pay more attention to the errors
parts.
5. Theory of Writing
There are many experts who define the term of writing, like Zimmeerman
and Rodrigues and Zamel.
Zimmeerman and Rodrigues (1992) point out that
writing is a way of sharing ideas with others (p. 4). Zamel (1983) states, “writing is a
process through which students can explore and discover their thoughts, constructing
meaning and assessing them at the same time,” (as cited in Ho, 2006, p. 2). It means
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
18
that the writer tries to gather ideas and constructs the meanings. In line with
Zimmeerman and Rodrigues and Zamel, in this study, writing means delivering
ideas through composing the narrative texts.
Walvoord (1985) states that writing can be judged as an effective writing if
the contents of the writing show the purpose of the writing for the readers (p. 2). For
example, if the purpose of the writing is to entertain to the readers, the contents of
the writing should make the readers amused. It means that to write something, we
need to be consequent with the purpose of our writing.
Scott (1996) states the ways to write briefly as follow (as cited in
Tangpermpun, 2008, p. 4):
a. Prewriting
In prewriting process, the students construct a brainstorming or a clustering
or a discussion. They may write freely as they know without concerning the correct
one or the stage of writing.
b. First draft composing
The students compose what they have in the brainstorming or clustering or
discussion as the first writing.
c. Feedback
In this part, the students will get comments from their friends or even their
teacher. The comments might deal with organizing ideas, spelling, diction, grammar,
etc.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
19
d.
Second draft writing
By having comments or feedback from the teacher or friends, the students
revise their writing as good as possible. They might add any ideas needed for their
writing.
e. Proofreading
In the final stage, the students both write their ideas and concern with the
grammar, vocabulary, mechanics, and layout carefully. Afterwards, they might give
their writing to other people to read.
6. Narrative Text
A narrative text is writing about a story which happened in the past to
amuse the readers. Abbott (2012) states that narrative is the representation of an
event (p. 12). Moreover, Wardiman, Jahur, and Djumas (2008) state that a narrative
text is a story to amuse people (p. 93).
Since narrative texts deal with stories in the past, the tense to use is simple
past tense. Widiati, Sulistyo, Suryati, Setiawan, and Ratnaningsih (2008) agree that
events which happened and ended in the past are describe
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
Purnamasari, Ervina Denny Kusuma. 2013. Errors in Writing Narrative Texts
Made by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: English
Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University.
The eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta had a chance to learn
and write narrative texts. They had difficulties in writing the texts, which was
indicated by their grammatical errors in their writing. Moreover, the students
were supposed to write good narrative texts. Thus, considering the students’
difficulties in writing, the researcher conducted this study, to analyze the
students’ errors in their narrative texts. This study was to help the students not to
make the errors anymore.
This study addressed three problems: (1) What errors do the eighth grade
students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta make in writing narrative texts based on the
surface strategy taxonomy theory? (2) What errors are mostly made by the eighth
grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts based on the
surface strategy taxonomy theory? (3) What are the factors causing the errors
done by the eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative
texts? In order to solve the problems, the researcher employed theories of errors
based on surface strategy taxonomy and theory of factors of errors.
This study employed qualitative research involving document analysis
and qualitative survey as the methods. The researcher used the students’ narrative
texts as the documents to be analyzed and conducted interviews with six students
and a teacher as the survey. The researcher employed purposive sampling to
choose the subjects.
The result indicated that four major types of errors based on surface
strategy taxonomy were found in the students’ narrative texts. The first type,
omission, dealt with the omission of grammatical morpheme. The second type
was addition encompassing double marking and simple addition. The third type,
misformation, was classified in archi/alternating form, while misordering, the
other type of error, was indicated by misplaces of auxiliaries in simple and
embedded questions, and an adverb. The mostly identified errors in the students’
writing were the omission type, occurring 63 times. Moreover, the errors
occurred because there was an influence of Bahasa Indonesia in writing the
narrative texts, the confusion of implementing grammar, and the lack of practice
in writing the texts. In addition, the students made errors because of the difficult
materials, in this case was grammar, and the teacher himself.
Keywords: errors, writing, narrative texts, factors of errors, error analysis.
vii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
Purnamasari, Ervina Denny Kusuma. 2013. Errors in Writing Narrative Texts
Made by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta:
Progam Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma
Murid kelas delapan SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, diberi kesempatan untuk
belajar dan menulis teks naratif. Dalam menulis, murid masih menghadapi
kesulitan pada pola kalimat. Melihat kesulitan tersebut, peneliti bertujuan
melakukan penelitian yakni menganalisa kesulitan dalam menulis teks naratif
yang diharapkan bisa membantu murid untuk tidak melakukan kesalahan lagi
dalam menulis.
Penelitian ini terdiri dari tiga rumusan masalah: (1) Kesalahan apa yang
dibuat oleh murid kelas depalan SMPN 8 Yogyakarta dalam menulis teks naratif
berdasarkan teori surface strategy taxonomy? (2) Kesalahan apa yang sering
terjadi dalam menulis teks naratif yang dibuat oleh murid kelas delapan SMPN 8
Yogyakarta berdasarkan teori surface strategy taxonomy? (3) Faktor apa yang
membuat murid melakukan kesalahan dalam menulis teks naratif? Ketiga
rumusan masalah tersebut akan dijawab dengan menggunakan teori tentang
kesalahan berdasarkan surface strategy taxonomy dan faktor penyebab
kesalahan.
Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif yang menggunakan metode
document analysis, dengan teks naratif sebagai dokumen yang dianalisa dan
qualitative survey dengan melakukan wawancara kepada enam murid beserta
guru bahasa Inggris. Dalam pemilihan responden, peneliti menggunakan
sampling purposive.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tipe kesalahan berdasarkan surface
strategy taxonomy ditemukan dalam teks narratif. Pertama, tipe omission,
dideskripsikan dengan omission of grammatical morpheme. Tipe addition
ditunjukkan dengan adanya double marking dan simple addition. Misformation,
yang ditunjukan dengan archi/alternating form, sedangkan tipe misordering
ditunjukkan dengan misplaces of auxiliaries in simple and embedded questions,
dan an adverb. Dari keempat tipe tersebut, tipe omission merupakan tipe yang
sering terjadi, dengan jumlah 63 kesalahan. Kesalahan- kesalahan tersebut
disebabkan oleh adanya pengaruh bahasa Indonesia, sulitnya mempelajari pola
kalimat bahasa Inggris, dan kurangnya latihan menulis. Di samping itu, guru
juga menjadi alasan mengapa murid melakukan kesalahan tersebut.
Kata Kunci: errors, writing, narrative texts, factors of errors, error analysis.
viii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ERRORS IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS MADE
BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS
OF SMPN 8 YOGYAKARTA
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
E. Denny Kusuma Purnamasari
Student Number: 091214127
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
2013
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ERRORS IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS MADE
BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS
OF SMPN 8 YOGYAKARTA
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
E. Denny Kusuma Purnamasari
Student Number: 091214127
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
2013
i
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
iii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
Dedicated to
Allah SWT
My lovely parents, Joseph Haryadi and Salmi S.Pd
My lovely brothers, Leo and Tanto and my
lovely sister-in-law, Laksmi
My lovely boyfriend, Wahyu Prasetyo Susilo
My lovely pet, Chivas
When life gives you a hundred reasons to cry, show life
that you have a thousand reasons to smile
(Borisando Sayoga)
iv
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
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, 9th October 2013
The Writer
E. Denny Kusuma Purnamasari
091214127
v
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama
: E. Denny Kusuma Purnamasari
Nomor Mahasiswa : 091214127
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
ERRORS IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS MADE
BY THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS
OF SMPN 8 YOGYAKARTA
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan
dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data,
mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain
untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan
royaliti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada Tanggal: 9 Oktober 2013
Yang menyatakan
E. Denny Kusuma Purnama Sari
vi
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
Purnamasari, Ervina Denny Kusuma. 2013. Errors in Writing Narrative Texts Made
by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: English
Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University.
The eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta had a chance to learn and
write narrative texts. They had difficulties in writing the texts, which was indicated
by their grammatical errors in their writing. Moreover, the students were supposed to
write good narrative texts. Thus, considering the students’ difficulties in writing, the
researcher conducted this study, to analyze the students’ errors in their narrative
texts. This study was to help the students not to make the errors anymore.
This study addressed three problems: (1) What errors do the eighth grade
students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta make in writing narrative texts based on the surface
strategy taxonomy theory? (2) What errors are mostly made by the eighth grade
students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts based on the surface
strategy taxonomy theory? (3) What are the factors causing the errors done by the
eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts? In order to
solve the problems, the researcher employed theories of errors based on surface
strategy taxonomy and theory of factors of errors.
This study employed qualitative research involving document analysis and
qualitative survey as the methods. The researcher used the students’ narrative texts
as the documents to be analyzed and conducted interviews with six students and a
teacher as the survey. The researcher employed purposive sampling to choose the
subjects.
The result indicated that four major types of errors based on surface strategy
taxonomy were found in the students’ narrative texts. The first type, omission, dealt
with the omission of grammatical morpheme. The second type was addition
encompassing double marking and simple addition. The third type, misformation,
was classified in archi/alternating form, while misordering, the other type of error,
was indicated by misplaces of auxiliaries in simple and embedded questions, and an
adverb. The mostly identified errors in the students’ writing were the omission type,
occurring 63 times. Moreover, the errors occurred because of an influence of Bahasa
Indonesia in writing the narrative texts, the confusion of implementing grammar, and
the lack of practice in writing the texts. In addition, the students made errors because
of the difficult materials, in this case was grammar, and the teacher himself.
Keywords: errors, writing, narrative texts, factors of errors, error analysis.
vii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
Purnamasari, Ervina Denny Kusuma. 2013. Errors in Writing Narrative Texts Made
by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Progam
Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma
Murid kelas delapan SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, diberi kesempatan untuk belajar
dan menulis teks naratif. Dalam menulis, murid masih menghadapi kesulitan pada
pola kalimat. Melihat kesulitan tersebut, peneliti bertujuan melakukan penelitian
yakni menganalisa kesulitan dalam menulis teks naratif yang diharapkan bisa
membantu murid untuk tidak melakukan kesalahan lagi dalam menulis.
Penelitian ini terdiri dari tiga rumusan masalah: (1) Kesalahan apa yang
dibuat oleh murid kelas depalan SMPN 8 Yogyakarta dalam menulis teks naratif
berdasarkan teori surface strategy taxonomy? (2) Kesalahan apa yang sering terjadi
dalam menulis teks naratif yang dibuat oleh murid kelas delapan SMPN 8
Yogyakarta berdasarkan teori surface strategy taxonomy? (3) Faktor apa yang
membuat murid melakukan kesalahan dalam menulis teks naratif? Ketiga rumusan
masalah tersebut akan dijawab dengan menggunakan teori tentang kesalahan
berdasarkan surface strategy taxonomy dan faktor penyebab kesalahan.
Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif yang menggunakan metode
document analysis, dengan teks naratif sebagai dokumen yang dianalisa dan
qualitative survey dengan melakukan wawancara kepada enam murid beserta guru
bahasa Inggris. Dalam pemilihan responden, peneliti menggunakan sampling
purposive.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tipe kesalahan berdasarkan surface
strategy taxonomy ditemukan dalam teks narratif. Pertama, tipe omission,
dideskripsikan dengan omission of grammatical morpheme. Tipe addition
ditunjukkan dengan adanya double marking dan simple addition. Misformation,
yang ditunjukan dengan archi/alternating form, sedangkan tipe misordering
ditunjukkan dengan misplaces of auxiliaries in simple and embedded questions, dan
an adverb. Dari keempat tipe tersebut, tipe omission merupakan tipe yang sering
terjadi, dengan jumlah 63 kesalahan. Kesalahan- kesalahan tersebut disebabkan
oleh adanya pengaruh bahasa Indonesia, sulitnya mempelajari pola kalimat bahasa
Inggris, dan kurangnya latihan menulis. Di samping itu, guru juga menjadi alasan
mengapa murid melakukan kesalahan tersebut.
Kata Kunci: errors, writing, narrative texts, factors of errors, error analysis.
viii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to thank Allah SWT. I really thank for his blessing
and mercy, which take me to the end of my meaningful time in finishing this thesis. I
realize that I am nothing without Allah SWT.
I would also express my gratitude to my major advisor, Dr. Retno Muljani,
M.Pd. I can finish this thesis well through her guidance. She always gives me good
advice and support during the process of this thesis.
My deepest appreciation goes to the Headmaster of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, H.
Suharno, S.Pd., S.Pd. T., M.Pd., for giving me permission to conduct this research
in SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. I would like to thank the English teacher of VIII/6,
Haryanto, S.Pd. MM., who has provided me the students’ narrative texts as the data
of this study. My deepest appreciation also goes to my respondents of this study, the
students of VIII/6.
I would like to thank my lovely parents, Joseph Haryadi and Salmi S.Pd.
They have given me warm smiles, hugs, patience, love, great encouragement, and
never ending prayers so that I can finish this thesis well. Moreover, I would like to
express my great gratitude to my lovely elder brother, Leo, my lovely younger
brother, Tanto, and my lovely sister-in-law, Laksmi for their support so that I can
finish this masterpiece.
My special gratitude and sincere appreciation also go to my lovely boyfriend,
Mas Ayuk. His love, patience, prayer and support encourage me to finish this thesis
ix
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
well. Furthermore, he always made me strong to face many problems in finishing this
thesis.
I would also like to appreciate my lovely friends, Ita, Helen, Sekar, Pipit,
Berta, Niken, Frisca, Leo, Bruder Markus, and Sayu. Their precious time given to
me encouraged me to finish this thesis happily. Furthermore, I would also like to
thank Sister Margareth, FCJ, Sesi, Sari, Wili, and Devi as my proofreaders.
Finally, I would dedicate my gratitude to those whose names I cannot
mention. I really thank for their prayers and their encouragement given to me to finish
this thesis.
E. Denny Kusuma Purnama Sari
x
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE …………………………………………………………...…
i
APPROVAL PAGES ...…………………………………………………...
ii
DEDICATION PAGE…………………………………………………......
iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY…………………………….
v
PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ……………………….........
vi
ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………..
vii
ABSTRAK …………………………………………………………………..
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ……………………………………………….
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………….
xi
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………
xv
LIST OF APPENDICES …………………………………………………
x vi
CHAPTER l. INTRODUCTION
A.
Research Background ………………………………
1
B.
Research Problems ………………………………..
4
C.
Problem Limitation …………………………………
5
D.
Research Objectives ………………………………
5
E.
Research Benefits …………………………………..
6
F.
Definition of Terms ………………………………….
7
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Theoretical description …………………………………
9
1. Theory of Errors …………………………..………
9
2. Types of Error .……………………………………
10
3. Factor Causing Errors ……………………………….
14
4. Errors Analysis …………………………………….
16
xi
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
5. Theory of Writing ………………………………….
17
6. Narrative Texts …………………………………….
19
7. Curriculum ………………………………………..
20
B. Theoretical Framework ……………………………….
21
CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY
A. Research Method ……………………………………...
23
B. Research Setting ………………………………………
25
C. Research Subjects …..………………..……………….
26
D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique ..
27
E. Data Analysis Technique …………………………….
28
F. Research Procedure …………………………………..
33
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Errors Made by the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta in Writing Narrative Texts …………….
35
1. Omission Type …………………………………..
36
2. Addition Type …………………………………..
39
3. Misformation Type ……………………………..
41
4. Misordering Type ………………………………
42
B. The Most Frequently Errors Made by the Students of Grade
Eighth of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in Writing Narrative Texts
………………………………………………………
44
C. Factors Causing Errors Made by the Students in Writing
Narrative Texts ……………………………………..
46
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Conclusions ………………………………………….
x ii
53
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
B. Recommendations …………………………………..
55
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………
56
APPENDICES …………………………………………………………
60
xiii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Tables
3.1.1 Classification of Omission of Major Constituents………………………………
29
3.1.2 Classification of Omission of Grammatical Morpheme…………………….. …
29
3.1.3 The Classification of Double Marking………………………………………….
30
3.1.4 The Classification of Simple Addition …………………………………………
30
3.1.5 Classification of Overregularization ………………………………………….
31
3.1.6 Classification of Archi/alternating form ………………………………………
31
3.1.7 Classification of Misordering Errors …………………………………..
31
3.2 The Most Frequently Errors Made by the Students ……………………………
32
4.1.1 Classification of Omission of Grammatical Morpheme …………………….
37
4.1.2 Classification of Double Marking ………………………………………
39
4.1.2 Classification of Simple Addition ……………………………………….
40
4.1.5 Classification of Archi/Alternating Form ……………………………………..
41
4.1.6 Classification of Misordering ………………………………………………….
43
4.2 The Number of the Major Types of Error……………………………………….
45
x iv
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
APPENDIX 1. A Permission Letter for Research Given to the
Headmaster of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta ………………………….
61
APPENDIX 2. A Permission Letter for Research Given to the Chairperson of
Permission Department ………………………………………
APPENDIX 3. A Confirmation Letter …………………………………………
62
63
APPENDIX 4. A Research Statement …………………………………………… 64
APPENDIX 5. The Examples of Students’ Narrative Texts ………………….
65
APPENDIX 6. Errors Found in the Students’ Narrative Texts ………………..
74
APPENDIX 7. Interview Guidelines ………..……………………………. ….
79
APPENDIX 8. Interview Transcripts …………………………………………..
81
APPENDIX 9. Other Findings ………………………………………………...
89
APPENDIX 10. People’s Opinions about SMPN 8 Yogyakarta ……………….
91
xv
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the introduction of this study. It consists of six parts,
namely the research background, research problems, problem limitation, research
objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms which will be used in this
study.
A.
Research Background
English, as an international language, is taught as one of the lessons to
junior high school in Indonesia, for instance in SMPN 8 Yogyakarta as the focus of
this study. The students of grades seven up to nine have to study English.
Furthermore, it is necessary for the students to study English well since it is included
in their final examination.
Students learn some genres of texts in an English lesson, one of them is
narrative texts as the focus of this study. According to Abbott (2002), narrative is the
representation of an event (p. 12). It means that narrative normally tells something
happening in the past. Furthermore, Wardiman, Jahur, and Djumas (2008) state that
a narrative text is a story to amuse people (p. 93). In this study, the researcher claims
that a narrative text is a text telling a story which happened in the past to amuse
readers.
1
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
2
This study focuses on narrative texts for their importance to study. Based on
Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan/KTSP, Standar Kompetensi/SK no 12 and
Kompetensi Dasar/KD no 12.2, narrative texts have to be given in grades eight and
nine. Furthermore, according to the English teacher of VIII/6 of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta, the eighth grade students are supposed to be able to compose narrative
texts well both in speaking and writing skills in semester two. Thus, it is significant
for the students to study narrative texts well.
Based on the English syllabus for VIII/6 of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, the
students will study narrative texts through four skills, namely reading, speaking,
listening, and writing. This study focuses on the writing skill especially writing
narrative texts due to several reasons. The first reason is based on a result of an
unintentionally conversation between the researcher and the students of VIII/6 which
indicates that some students still have difficulties in writing since there are many
tenses to learn. The English teacher of VIII/6 said that there were some students who
had difficulties in implementing tenses in writing texts. However, after the
researcher read the students’ writing, the researcher not only found errors in tenses
but the researcher also discovered some grammatical errors made by the students
from class VIII/6 in writing recount texts and narrative texts. Considering those
facts, the researcher becomes interested in knowing further whether the students still
have difficulties in using grammar in writing narrative texts or not.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
3
Actually, there have been studies of analyzing errors in writing texts. One of
the studies had been conducted by Indriawati (2008) who focused on narrative texts.
She chose SMAN 2 Klaten as the setting of the study. The focus of her study was
textual features in writing the narrative texts. The study revealed how well the
students wrote the narrative texts using generic structure and how well simple past
tense they had in their narrative texts was. Another research was conducted by
Anggraheni (2008) who analyzed errors in recount texts done by the students of
SMP Kanisius. The errors she analyzed dealt with morphology, syntax, and
taxonomy. The last researcher, Hanafitria (2009), analyzed students’ errors in
writing descriptive texts. The errors she focused on were spelling, vocabulary, word
class, sentence structure, and punctuation.
The focus of this study is different from the previous researches. In this
study, the researcher focuses more on errors made by the eighth grade students of
SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in creating narrative texts based on surface strategy taxonomy,
which deals with students’ cognitive ability. According to Dulay, Burt, and Khrasen
(1982), errors of this type are characterized by omission of morphemes, addition of
an item which should not appear in an utterance, misordering, and misformation (p.
150). Moreover, Dulay, et al. (1982) claim that identifying errors from surface
strategy taxonomy gives great promises for the researchers to know the students’
cognitive processes in reconstructing the new language (p. 150). Thus, the researcher
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
4
employs surface strategy taxonomy to know the students’ cognitive ability in
reconstructing English through writing narrative texts.
In addition, in this study, the researcher chose SMPN 8 Yogyakarta, which
according to five of five people is considered as a famous school in Yogyakarta. The
students studying in this school are excellent and well selected. Furthermore, SMPN
8 is considered as an international school. Thus, it is quite challenging to know
whether the students from a well-known school have difficulties or not in writing
narrative texts.
B. Research Problems
The researcher addresses three research problems related to this study. The
research problems are stated as follows:
1.
What errors do the eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta make in
writing narrative texts based on the surface strategy taxonomy theory?
2.
What errors are mostly made by the eighth grade students of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts based on the surface strategy taxonomy
theory?
3.
What are the factors causing errors done by the eighth grade students of SMPN
8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts?
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
5
C. Problem Limitation
This study focuses on revealing errors in writing narrative texts done by the
students of VIII/6 of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta. The errors that the researcher deals with
are identified by using the surface strategy taxonomy theory. Dulay et al. (1982)
propose that errors based on surface strategy taxonomy are characterized by
omission of morphemes, addition of an item which should not appear in an
utterance, misordering, and misformation (p. 151). Thus, the researcher focuses on
errors based on those types (omission, addition, misformation, and misordering).
This study focuses on one class, namely VIII/6 due to two reasons. The first
reason is that the researcher has found errors made by the students of that class on
their writing. Furthermore, this class is the only class which has an opportunity to
write narrative texts in semester two asked by their teacher.
Due to time limitation, the researcher has one chance to collect data for the
first and second research problems. Further, the researcher can only interview six
students to discover factors causing errors as the answer to the third research
problem.
D. Research Objectives
In this study, the researcher provides the aims of this study. The following
are the objectives of this study:
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
6
1. To know what errors made by the students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing
narrative texts.
2. To identify the errors mostly made by the students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in
writing narrative texts.
3. To discover the underlying reasons of making errors in composing narrative
texts.
E. Research Benefits
In this study, the researcher provides research benefits for the English
teacher of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta and also the eighth grade students of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta. The research benefits are presented as follows:
1.
English Teacher of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta
By studying errors made by the students of VIII/6 of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in
writing narrative texts, the English teacher can know the students’ difficulties in
their writing. Moreover, since the errors will be categorized into some types, the
teacher will know the most difficult area faced by the students in writing narrative
texts. Thus, it enables the teacher to pay attention more to the parts in which the
errors mostly occur.
2.
Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta
By being shown the errors made by the students in writing narrative texts,
the students will know their erroneous in their writing. Furthermore, the students can
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
7
correct their errors in their writing, which enables them to study the parts in which
they make the errors. Thus, it is expected that the students will not make errors
anymore in composing other narrative texts after knowing their errors.
F.
Definition of Terms
The researcher provides some definitions of terms related to this study.
They are:
1.
Error
According to Chomsky (1965), errors are the result of the lack of knowledge
(as cited in Dulay et al., 1982, p. 139). The theory from Chomsky is supported by
Erdogan (2005) saying, “an error is the use of a linguistic item in a way that a fluent
or native speaker of the language regards it as showing faulty or incomplete learning
(p. 263).” It means that errors happen because the learners have not mastered the
materials well due to the faulty or incomplete learning. In line with Chomsky and
Erdogan, errors in this study deal with the students’ difficulties in writing narrative
texts.
2. Writing
Zimmeerman and Rodrigues (1992) claim that writing is a way of sharing
ideas with others (p. 4). Zamel (1983) states that writing is a process through which
students can explore and discover their thoughts, constructing meaning and assessing
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
8
it at the same time,” (as cited in Ho, 2006, p. 2). In this study, writing deals with
discovering students’ thoughts in writing narrative texts.
3.
Narrative Text
Abbott (2002) points out that narrative is the representation of an event (p.
12). Priyana, Irjayanti, and Renitasari (2008) state that narrative texts is a story
telling about events dealing with problems and having unexpected outcomes (p.
164). In line with Priyana et al. and Abbott, narrative texts in this study refer to a
story which happened in the past.
4. Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta
The students in this study refer to the eighth grade students of SMPN 8
Yogyakarta sitting in VIII/6 as the subjects of this study. There are 17 female and 13
male students. They have an opportunity to study narrative texts and construct them
in semester two. Thus, the researcher aims to examine errors in narrative texts
written by the students of VIII/6 of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter provides some theories which support this study. It consists of
two parts, namely theoretical description and theoretical framework.
A. Theoretical Description
This part describes the theories of errors, writing, and narrative texts. In
addition, this part reveals curriculum briefly.
1.
Theory of Errors
Since English is a foreign language in Indonesia, the students who study it
might find difficulties in using it. Dulay et al. (1982) agree that people certainly
make errors in studying language (p. 138). Moreover, Ellis (1997) says that errors
will always occur if the students do not understand what the correct forms are (p.
18). It means that the learners might continually make errors before they know the
correct form of the target language.
Errors happen because the learners have not mastered the lesson well due to
the faulty or incomplete learning. Erdogan (2005) says, “an error is the use of
linguistic item in a way that a fluent or native speaker of the language regards it as
showing faulty or incomplete learning” (p. 263). Moreover, according to Chomsky
(1965), errors are the result of the lack of knowledge (as cited in Dulay et al. 1982,
9
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
10
p. 139). Ellis (1997) states that errors happen because the students do not know what
the correct ones are (p. 17). Erdogan (2005) provides an example of an error in the
following sentence “A strange thing *happen to me yesterday” (p. 264). The
sentence should be “A strange thing happened to me yesterday.”
According to Ellis (1997) errors are different from mistakes because:
“Errors reflect gaps in a learner’s knowledge; they occur because the students
do not know the correct one. Mistakes reflect occasional lapses in
performance; they occur because, in a particular instance, the learner is unable
to perform what he or she knows” (p. 17).
The statements from Ellis describe the differences between errors and
mistakes. Errors are affected by the students’ limited knowledge. The students have
not mastered the materials well and they do not know the correct ones. Mistakes, on
the other hand, happen when the student fails to perform what he or she actually
knows. Here are the examples of errors and mistakes provided by Ellis (1997):
Errors:
A student said, “A man and a little boy *was watching him.”
Mistakes:
In the beginning of a narrative a student said, “The big of them contained a
snake.” However, in the final sentence, he said, “The basket *contain a snake”
(p. 16).
2. Types of Errors
There are four major types of errors proposed by Dulay et al. (1982),
namely linguistics category taxonomy, surface strategy taxonomy, comparative
taxonomy, and communicative effect taxonomy. Dulay et al. (1982) state that
linguistics category taxonomy deals with classifying errors according to either or
both the language components or the particular linguistic constituent (p. 146).
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
11
Surface strategy taxonomy highlights the ways surface structures are altered.
Comparative taxonomy deals with the classification of errors based on comparison
between the structure of L2 errors and certain other types of construction.
Communicative effect taxonomy deals with errors from the perspective of their
effect on the listener or reader. However, in this study, the researcher focuses on
errors based on surface strategy taxonomy because Dulay et al. (1985) declare that it
holds great promise for researchers concerning with identifying cognitive processes
that underlie the learner’s reconstruction of the new language (p. 150).
Ellis (1997) provides types of errors such as omission, misformation, and
misordering. Omission refers to the missing of an item which should be provided in
an utterance. Misinformation refers to the using of one grammatical form to another
grammatical form. Misordering, on the other hand, is putting words in an utterance
incorrectly (p. 18).
In comparison with Dulay et al. Ellis’ theory about types of errors is similar
in some aspects with Dulay’s et al. theory. However, Dulay et al. group their types
of errors (omission, addition, misinformation, and misordering) into surface strategy
taxonomy. Dulay et al. (1982) state, “analyzing errors from surface strategy
taxonomy concerns with identifying cognitive processes that underlie the learner’s
reconstruction of the new language” (p. 150). Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) clarify
that surface strategy taxonomy shows that the learners carry out their cognitive
comparison by noticing elements in their utterances (p. 61). It means that surface
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
12
strategy taxonomy deals with the students’ cognitive processes in understanding and
implementing the target language.
The following types of errors are the classifications of errors based on the
surface strategy taxonomy theory proposed by Dulay et al. (1982).
a.
Omission
An omission occurs because there is a missing item which should be
provided in an utterance. The omission can be indicated by the lack of the major
constituent in the utterance like a head noun, a subject, a main verb, and a direct
object, for instance, “Don’t give *__to me.” The sentence does not have an object.
Thus, the utterance should be “Don’t give it to me.” In addition, the lack of
grammatical morpheme such as the omissions of a preposition, an article, a short
plural, a long plural, an auxiliary, a copula, a progressive form, an infinitive, a
regular and irregular past tense verb, and a third person singular form also indicate
kinds of omission, for example, Leo *buy *__book. The sentence is incorrect
because it is lack of morphemes “s” and “a”. It should be “Leo buys a book.”
b. Addition
An addition shows an excess of an unnecessary item in an utterance. The
addition itself is divided into three classifications: double marking, regularization,
and simple addition. Double marking refers to two items in the same feature. Double
marking can be indicated by the excess of present indicative verbs, regular past and
irregular past tense verbs, and indirect objects, for example, “She didn’t *drank a
cup of tea” which should be “she did not drink a cup of tea.” Regularization refers to
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
13
a marker put in items which do not need the marker, for example, eated, deers, and
sheeps. Simple addition, on the other hand, occurs because of the use of an item
which should not appear in an utterance. It can be indicated by an unnecessary
preposition, an articles and a third person singular form existing in a sentence, for
example, “*a this”.
c. Misformation
Misformation is another kind of errors. It is indicated by the wrong form of
a morpheme or a structure, for example, “The dog *eated the chicken.”
Misinformation is divided into three classifications: regularization errors, archiforms, and alternating forms. Regularization occurs if the learners use a regular
marker to mark an irregular one. It can be described in the wrong form of a reflexive
pronoun, a regular past tense verb, and a third person singular form, for example “I
*drinked.” Drink is an irregular verb which does not need a suffix to make it into a
past tense verb. The word drink should be “drank. “ Archi-forms are the use of a
determiner for a thing to refer to entire things. For example, “*that dogs” which
should be those dogs. According to Dulay et al. (1982), “the use of archi-forms often
gives a way to apparently fairly free alternation of various members of class with
each other” (p. 161). Archi/alternating form can be indicated by the wrong form of
an auxiliary, a preposition, a subject pronoun, a possessive pronoun, and a
demonstrative, for example, “I am waiting *of you” which should be “I am waiting
for you.”
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
14
d. Misordering
Misordering, the other type of errors occurs when the learners place a
morpheme or a group of morphemes in an incorrect place. It can be indicated by a
wrong place of an auxiliary in simple and embedded questions, and an adverb, for
example, he *everyday is handsome. The word everyday is not in an appropriate
place. It should be placed in the beginning or the end of the sentence. Thus, the
correct sentence should be “he is handsome everyday.”
Ellis (1997) declares that types of errors can help the researcher diagnose
what errors the learners make (p. 18). Thus, those types of errors proposed by Dulay
et al. enable the researcher to know what type of errors the eighth grade students of
SMPN 8 Yogyakarta make. Besides, the researcher can help the teacher find which
parts of the materials in which the students still have difficulties.
3. Factors Causing Errors
Students make errors because of some factors. The researcher claims the
same causes of errors with a study of textual features of the narrative text by
Indrayati (2008). The causes of errors that the researcher focuses on are taken from
Brown. The factors causing errors proposed by Brown (1987) are interlingual
transfer, intralingual transfer, context of learning and communication strategies (p.
224).
Brown (1987) proposes that interlingual transfer is similar with
interferences (p. 177). Richard (1971) clarifies that interference errors deal with the
habitually in using the first language affects the use of the second language (as cited
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
15
in Ellis, 2008, p. 53). It means that the existence of the first language can influence
the students in using the target language.
Brown (1987) claims that intralingual transfer is the major factor in the
second language learning (p. 178). Richard (1971) proposes that intralingual transfer
concerns with problems in generalization, incomplete application of rules and learn
the rule of language unsuccessfully (as cited in Ellis, 2008, p. 53). It means that
intralingual transfer indicates that in implementing the rule of the target language,
the students might simply make overgeneralization.
According to Brown (1987), context refers to the collaboration between the
classroom with its teacher and materials in the case of school learning. Furthermore,
in a classroom context, the teacher and the textbook can lead the learner to make
faulty hypotheses about the language (p. 179). It means that the possible causes
which make the students deliver incorrect hypotheses of the target language are the
teacher itself and the textbook.
Faerch and Kasper (1983a) state that a communication strategy deals with
conscious plans for solving what to an individual presents itself as a problem in
reaching a particular communicative goal (as cited in Brown, 2000, p. 180). It means
that a communication strategy is used to overcome the individuals’ problems to
convey their meanings.
According to Tarone (1981) communication strategies are classified into
some classifications as follow. The first classification is paraphrase consisting of
approximation, word coinage, and circumlocution. Approximation is the use of
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
16
single target language that the learner knows is not correct. Word coinage refers to
making a new word to communicate a desired concept. Circumlocution, on the other
hand, is describing the characteristics of the object instead of using the appropriate
target language. The second classification is borrowing consisting of literal
translation or translating word by word and language switch or using the native
language without bothering to translate it. The third classification is appeal for
assistance consisting of mime referring to the using of nonverbal strategies in a place
of a lexical item. The last classification is avoidance consisting of topic of avoidance
referring to the learner trying not to talk about concepts for which the target
language is not known and message abandonment or the learners begin to talk about
concepts but is unable to continue (p. 286).
Erdogan (2005) proposes factors of errors which support Brown’s
explanations about sources of errors, namely interlingual transfer and intralingual
transfer. Erdogan points out that interlingual transfer occurs because of an influence
from the first language in using the target language. Intralingual transfer, on the
other hand, deals with the influence of one target language item upon another (p.
265).
4. Error Analysis
Selinker and Gass (2001) state, “error analysis is a type of linguistics
analysis concerning with errors done by learners (p. 79).” Dulay et al. (1982) claim
that error analysis is observing students’ errors (p. 138). In line with Selinker and
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
17
Gass and Dulay et al. in this study, error analysis is the study of errors made by the
eighth grade students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts.
Erdogan (2005) states, “error analysis deals with the learners’ performance
in terms of the cognitive processes they make use of in recognizing or coding the
input they receive from the target language” (p. 263). What Erdogan means is that
error analysis deals with the students’ cognitive ability in implementing what they
have got. The researcher aims to analyze errors made by the eighth grade students of
SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in writing narrative texts to know their mastery in composing
narrative texts.
Dulay et al. (1982) say that studying students’ errors has aims which are to
give data to show to the teachers and curriculum developers about the students’
difficulties in some parts and to show what type of errors the students make (p. 138).
The purpose of error analysis proposed by Dulay et al. is related to the objective of
this study which is to show errors made by the students of SMPN 8 Yogyakarta in
writing narrative texts, which can help the teacher to pay more attention to the errors
parts.
5. Theory of Writing
There are many experts who define the term of writing, like Zimmeerman
and Rodrigues and Zamel.
Zimmeerman and Rodrigues (1992) point out that
writing is a way of sharing ideas with others (p. 4). Zamel (1983) states, “writing is a
process through which students can explore and discover their thoughts, constructing
meaning and assessing them at the same time,” (as cited in Ho, 2006, p. 2). It means
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
18
that the writer tries to gather ideas and constructs the meanings. In line with
Zimmeerman and Rodrigues and Zamel, in this study, writing means delivering
ideas through composing the narrative texts.
Walvoord (1985) states that writing can be judged as an effective writing if
the contents of the writing show the purpose of the writing for the readers (p. 2). For
example, if the purpose of the writing is to entertain to the readers, the contents of
the writing should make the readers amused. It means that to write something, we
need to be consequent with the purpose of our writing.
Scott (1996) states the ways to write briefly as follow (as cited in
Tangpermpun, 2008, p. 4):
a. Prewriting
In prewriting process, the students construct a brainstorming or a clustering
or a discussion. They may write freely as they know without concerning the correct
one or the stage of writing.
b. First draft composing
The students compose what they have in the brainstorming or clustering or
discussion as the first writing.
c. Feedback
In this part, the students will get comments from their friends or even their
teacher. The comments might deal with organizing ideas, spelling, diction, grammar,
etc.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
19
d.
Second draft writing
By having comments or feedback from the teacher or friends, the students
revise their writing as good as possible. They might add any ideas needed for their
writing.
e. Proofreading
In the final stage, the students both write their ideas and concern with the
grammar, vocabulary, mechanics, and layout carefully. Afterwards, they might give
their writing to other people to read.
6. Narrative Text
A narrative text is writing about a story which happened in the past to
amuse the readers. Abbott (2012) states that narrative is the representation of an
event (p. 12). Moreover, Wardiman, Jahur, and Djumas (2008) state that a narrative
text is a story to amuse people (p. 93).
Since narrative texts deal with stories in the past, the tense to use is simple
past tense. Widiati, Sulistyo, Suryati, Setiawan, and Ratnaningsih (2008) agree that
events which happened and ended in the past are describe