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

  ERRORS AMONG OF ENGLISH LA OF SA Presented to O ENGLISH LA DEPARTMEN FACULTY O

i

  

RORS IN FORMING INDIRECT SPEEC

ONG THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDEN

SH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY P

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

sented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requiremen

to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

  By Francisca Yulia Martaningrum

  Student Number: 081214069

  

ISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROG

TMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCA TY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCA

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

2012

  SPEECH STUDENTS DY PROGRAM SITY ements

ROGRAM UCATION UCATION

  

ABSTRACT

  Martaningrum, Francisca Yulia. (2012). Errors in forming indirect speech among

  

the fourth semester students of English Language Education Study Program of

Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

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

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

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

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

  Keywords: error, error analysis, indirect speech, direct speech

vi

  

ABSTRAK

  Martaningrum, Francisca Yulia. (2012). Errors in forming indirect speech among

  

the fourth semester students of English Language Education Study Program of

Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Dharma.

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

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

  Ditemukan bahwa lebih kurang 40% jawaban mahasiswa masih mengandung kesalahan. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa banyak mahasiswa masih membuat kesalahan dalam membentuk kalimat tidak langsung, yang terdiri dari: kesalahan dalam tenses, kata ganti, kata keterangan, kata penunjuk, urutan kata, dan kata hubung. Kesalahan-kesalahan juga dianalisa menggunakan surface

  

structure taxonomy (Dulay et al., 1982), dan hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa

  kesalahan kesalahan tersebut dapat dikategorikan menjadi kesalahan dalam bentuk

  

addition, omission, misformation, dan misordering. Hal-hal yang mungkin

  menyebabkan kesalahan dianalisis menggunakan teori Brown tentang penyebab terjadinya kesalahan (2000). Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa hanya interlingual

  

transfer dan intralingual transfer yang dapat diterapkan. Konteks pembelajaran

  dan strategi komunikasi tidak dapat diaplikasikan karena peneliti tidak meneliti lebih jauh tentang proses pembelajaran mahasiswa dan cara mahasiswa berkomunikasi. Penyebab kesalahan yang tidak termasuk dalam teori Brown kemudian dikategorikan dalam penyebab kesalahan lain. Dari analisis yang dilakukan, kesalahan yang tidak disebabkan oleh interlingual transfer maupun

  

intralingual transfer paling banyak disebabkan oleh ketidakpedulian mahasiswa

terhadap konteks kalimat.

vii

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

  

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

langsung

viii

  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  Francisca Yulia Martaningrum

x

  

xi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  Page TITLE PAGE ……………………………………………………………... i APPROVAL PAGES ……………………………………………………... ii STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY …………………………… iv

  

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI …………………………… v

  ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………. vi

  

ABSTRAK …………………………………………………………………. vii

  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………………. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………………. xi LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………... xiv LIST OF APPENDICES ………………………………………………….. xv CHAPTER I.

  INTRODUCTION …………………………………….

  1 A. Background of the Study ……………………….....

  1 B. Research Problem …………………………….........

  4 C. Problem Limitation ………………………………...

  4 D. Objectives of the Study ……………………………

  5 E. Benefits of the Study ……………………………....

  5 F. Definition of Terms ………………………………..

  6

  CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ……………

  8 A. Theoretical Description ……………………………

  8 1. Error Analysis ……………………………….....

  8 2. Indirect Speech …………………………............

  14 B. Theoretical Framework ……………………………

  21 CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ……………………..

  25 A. Research Method ………………………………….

  25 B. Research Setting …………………………………...

  26 C. Research Participants ………………………………

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

  27 1. Validity ………………………………………....

  28 2. Test Reliability ………………………………….

  30 E. Data Analysis Technique …………………………..

  32 F. Research Procedure ………………………………..

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

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

  35 1. Errors in Indirect Statements ……………….......

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

  39

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

  43 4. Errors in Indirect Commands …………………..

  46

  

xii

  5. Errors in Indirect Exclamations ………………...

  49 B. The Possible Causes of Errors …………………….

  51

  1. Interlingual Transfer as the Possible Cause of Errors…………………………………………….

  52

  2. Intralingual Transfer as the Possible Cause of Errors…………………………………………….

  54 3. Other Sources of Errors ………………………..

  55 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS …..

  58 A. Conclusions ………………………………………..

  58 B. Recommendations …………………………………

  62

  1. Recommendations for the Structure Class Lecturers of ELESP ……………………………

  62

  2. Recommendations for the Students of ELESP …

  63

  3. Recommendations for Other Researchers ………

  63 REFERENCES …………………………………………………………….

  65 APPENDICES …………………………………………………………….

  67

  

xiii

  

xiv

LIST OF TABLES

  3.1 Test Items Distribution based on the Basic Types of Indirect Speech …

  46 4.5 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Exclamations …….

  43 4.4 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Commands ……….

  40 4.3 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Yes-No Questions...

  36 4.2 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect WH-Questions …...

  31 4.1 Percentage of Students’ Errors in Forming Indirect Statements ………..

  29 3.2 Crude Criterion for the Evaluation of a Coefficient (Best, 1983: 255) ...

  24

  Table Page

  24 2.5 Shifts in Different Types of Indirect Speech …………………………...

  17 2.4 Backshifts in Tenses …….……………………………………………...

  2.3 Shifts in Adverbial Time (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 697) …………………………………………………………………….

  15

  9

  2.2 The Examples of Backshift (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 689) ………………………………………………………………….....

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

  49

  LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1 The Permission Letters …………………………………...

  68 Appendix 2 The Test ……..……………..……………………………..

  69 Appendix 3 The Answer Key ………………………………………….

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

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

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

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

  83

  xv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This chapter is divided into six parts. They are background of the study,

  problem formulation, problem limitation, objectives of the study, benefits of the study, and definition of terms.

A. Background of the Study

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

  When someone is able to make an acceptable sentence, s/he is able to communicate or deliver messages to others effectively.

  In communicating with others, both in written and oral communication, a speaker sometimes needs to deliver a different person’s message to other people.

  For example, when David tells Kevin that he is going to go to the beach, he will say, “I’m going to go to the beach tomorrow.” The sentence uttered by Kevin is called direct speech. The speech is different when Kevin told what David had said

  1

  2 to him to another friend in different time and situation by using indirect speech.

  Using indirect speech, Kevin will say the sentence as David said that he was going to go to the beach the next day.

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

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

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

  3 English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) of Sanata Dharma

  University is conducted. Fourth semester students are chosen because it is considered that they had learned about indirect speech in the third semester.

  Besides, based on the researcher’s experience and observation, the fourth semester students were still confused and tended to make some errors in changing direct speech into indirect speech although they had learned about it in the previous semester.

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

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

  4 B. Research Problem

  The problems of the research are stated in two questions:

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

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

C. Problem Limitation

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

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

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

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

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

  D. Objectives of the Study

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

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

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

  E. Benefits of the Study

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

1. Structure Class Lecturers of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University

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

  6

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

2. Students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University

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

F. Definition of Terms

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

1. Indirect Speech

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

  7

  2. Error

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

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

  3. The Fourth Semester Students of ELESP

  This research is conducted to find out errors in forming indirect speech among the fourth semester students of ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.

  Fourth semester students are students who are in the fourth semester of university. In this case, the fourth semester students are those who entered the university in 2010/2011 academic year. It means that they are in the second years of their study in ELESP. In the fourth semester, most of the students take Structure IV class, which is the continuation of Structure I, II, and III classes.

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE This chapter deals with related literature. It consists of two parts:

  theoretical description and theoretical framework. Theoretical description deals with the theories relevant to this research. Meanwhile, theoretical framework deals with the relation between the research matters and the theories.

A. Theoretical Description

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

1. Error Analysis

  “Error Analysis (EA) consists of a set of procedures for identifying, describing and explaining learners’ errors.” (Ellis and Barkhuizen, 2005: 51).

  Norrish (1983) explains that an EA can be used to find students’ difficulty in mastering a material. By using EA, teachers can objectively assess how their teaching gives contribution to students. According to Corder (1974), as stated by Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005: 57), there are some steps in conducting error analysis.

  They are collecting a sample of learner language, identifying errors, describing errors, explaining errors, and evaluating errors.

  8

  9

a. Collection of a Sample of Learner Language

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

  

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

Factors Description

A. Learner

  1. Proficiency level

  2. Other languages

  3. Language learning background Elementary, intermediate, or advanced The learners’ L1, other L2s Instructed, naturalistic, mixed

  B. Language 1) Medium 2) Genre 3) Content

  Oral or written Conversation, narrative, essay, etc The topic of the discourse

  C. Production 1) Unplanned 2) Planned The discourse is produced spontaneously

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

planning.

b. Identification of Errors

  Identification of errors is a process in which the learners’ production and what native speakers in the same level will produce are compared in the same context. The procedures in identifying errors according to Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) are: 1) Preparing reconstruction of the sample as the native speaker in the same level would produce.

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

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

c. Description of Errors

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

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

  1) Omission

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

  2) Addition

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

  11 example is the addition of –ed in the past form of the word eat instead of using

  ate, so that the word becomes eated.

  3) Misformation

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

  4) Misordering

  Dulay et al. (1982: 162) state “Misordering errors are characterized by the incorrect placement of a morpheme or group of morphemes in an utterance.” The example is the misplacement of the word is on the sentence I do not know what is it, which should be I do not know what it is.

d. Explanation of Errors

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

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

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

  1) Interlingual Transfer

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

  2) Intralingual Transfer

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

  13

  3) Context of Learning

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

  4) Communication Strategies

  Communication strategies, according to Brown (2000: 227), “were defined and related to learning styles. Learners obviously use production strategies in order to enhance getting their message across, but at times these techniques can themselves become source of errors.” The example is when a learner says, “Let us

  

work for the well done of our country.” While it shows a little twist of humor, the

sentence had an incorrect approximation of the word welfare.

e. Error Evaluation

  Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) explain that error evaluation is conducted to determine which errors should be given instruction. It includes some steps: 1) Selecting errors which should be evaluated 2) Deciding the criterion where the errors should be judged 3) Preparing the instruments for evaluating errors: a set of instructions, the erroneous sentence or text, and a method to evaluate errors 4) Choosing the judges

  14

2. Indirect Speech

  According to Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman (1999), indirect speech is used “when one wishes to report the content of the original source without necessarily repeating sentences exactly as they were originally uttered” (p. 687). Indirect speech is derived from direct speech. Direct speech “refers to reproducing words exactly as they were originally spoken” (Azar, 1993: 273). Direct speech and indirect speech have different form. The main difference is in the way of writing. According to Azar (1993), direct speech always uses quotation marks.

  Meanwhile, in indirect speech, there are no quotation marks.

  Yule (2004) states indirect speech is introduced by a Quotative Frame. Quotative Frame consists of three parts. They are attributed speakers (e.g., he, she,

  

the boss, my teacher), reporting verb (e.g., said, asked, tell, report), and

  conjunction (e.g., that, if, whether). Quotative Frame is also called reporting clause. The reporting clause then followed by reported clause, which consists of the clause that is reported in the speech. For example:

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

  In example [1], the clause “Smith reports that…” is called reporting clause. The word report is called reporting verb. While the clause “…budget cuts

  

may occur during this recession” is called reported clause. In the example, the

  word that is put in the bracket since it is optional. According to Thomson and Martinet (1986: 254), it is allowed to omit that when the reporting verb is say or

  15

  

tell. However, when reporting verb like complain, explain, object, and point out is

used, that cannot be omitted.

a. Changes in Transferring Direct Speech into Indirect Speech

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

1) Tense

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

  tomorrow”, the backshift is presented in Table 2.2.

  

Table 2.2: The Examples of Backshift

(Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 689)

Reporting Verb Tense Indirect Speech Simple Present  no backshift She says that she is leaving tomorrow.

  Present Perfect  no backshift She has said that she is leaving tomorrow.

Simple Past  to past progressive She said that she was leaving tomorrow/the next

tense day.

  Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman (1999) state there are also some exceptions in backshift. There will be no backshifts if: 1) The event stated by the speaker remains true. 2) What is conveyed by the speaker is general truth. 3) The statement is reported to third person by a second person immediately after it is said by the first person.

  16

  2) Pronouns

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

  [2] Original quote by Mary: “I hope that Fred gets better soon.” Report by Fred: Mary says that she hopes that I get better soon.

  Report by someone speaking to Fred: Mary says that she hopes that

  you get better soon. (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 698) 3) Demonstratives and Adverbials of Time and Place

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

  [3] Smith: “School budgets will not be cut during this recession.” Smith predicted that no school budget cuts would occur during this recession.

  Smith predicted that no school budget cuts would occur during that recession. (Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999: 696) In example [3], the use of this or that depends on the reporter’s assumption. The reporter uses this when the recession is still in the process at the time when the reporter is reporting Smith’s statement. Meanwhile, the reporter uses that when the recession has been overtime when the reporter is speaking.