Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKurniawan, Dwi Agung
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-02T02:56:27Z
dc.date.available2019-08-02T02:56:27Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationAl-Khasawneh, Fadi Maher. 2014. Error Analysis of Written English Paragraphs by Jordanian Undergraduate Students: A Case Study. International Journal of English Language, Literature, and Humanities, Volume II, Issue VIII, ISSN 2321-7065. Faculty of Arts and Educational Sciences, Ajloun National University. Ajloun: Jordan. Brown, H. Douglas. 1980. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Brown, H. Douglas. 2007. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. San Fransico State Univerity. The United States of America: Longman. Darus, Saadiyah., Ching, Khor Hei. 2009. Common Errors in Written English Essays of Form One Chinese Students: A Case Study. European Journal of Social Sciences, Volume 10, Number 2. School of Language Studies and Linguistics: Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Fauziati, Endang. 2010. Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Surakarta. Muhammadiyah University Press. Fraenkel, R. Wallen, E. Hyun, H. 2012. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. McGrraw-Hill. Hatch, E., & Lazaraton, A. 1991. The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. New York: Newbury House. Hau Tse, Andrew Yau. 2014. A Case Study of Grammatical Errors Made by Malaysian Students. International Journal of Science Commerce and Humanities Volume No 2 No 5. Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman Faculty of Arts & Social Science, Perak Campus 31900 Kampar: Malaysia. Hussain, Zahoor.,Hanif, Muhammed.,Asif, Saiqa Imtiaz.,Rehman, Abaid Ur. 2013. An Error Analysis of L2 Writing at Higher Secondary Level in Multan, Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Vol 4, no 11. BZU Bahadur Campus: Layyah. Krishnasamy, Jothimalar. 2015. Grammatical Error Analysis in Writing of ESL Diploma Students. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning (ISSN: 2321 – 2454) Volume 03 – Issue 01. INTI International University (Laureate International Universities); Persiaran Perdana BBN, Putra Nilai, 71800 Nilai, Negeri Sembilan Darul Khusus, Malaysia. Richard, J.C.1971. Error Analysis. London: Longman. Zhang, Meng. 2011. Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Focus Vol.1, pp.85-93.id_ID
dc.identifier.issn2621-1661
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11617/11281
dc.description.abstractThis research points out the errors analysis in students’ writing and it is aimed to decsribe the types of errors found in the students’ writing result made by Junior, Senior, and University students, to know the frequencies of each type of errors found in the students’ writing result made by Junior, Senior, and University Students, to explain the similarities and differences types of errors found in the students’ writing result made by Junior, Senior, and University students, and to investigate the causes of errors found in the students’ writing result made by Junior, Senior, and University students. There are three types of errors namely lexical error (22,46%), syntactical error (199,41%), and discourse error (100,37%). These types of errors have 13 categories of errors; 1) spelling; 2) false friend; 3) to be; 4) bound morpheme s/es; 5) verb tense; 6) articles (a,an,the); 7) preposition; 8) to infinitive; 9) modal auxiliary; 10) passive voice; 11) cohesion; 12) ceherence; and 13) generic structure. There are eighteen error cases. The researcher found junior students made more errors than senior and university students, there are 91 errors sentences in junior students, whereas senior students have 43 erroneous sentences and university students have 35 erroneous sentences. The similarities of errors found in junior, senior and university students are: Omission of Bound Morpheme‘s/es’ as the Plural Marker, Using Verb 1 for Past Event, Using Incorrect Verb 2, False Friend, Omission Errors in the Form of Preposition, Using Verb 1 after to Infinitive, Using Verb 1 after Modal Auxiliary, and Using Passive Voice Form Incorrectly. While, the differences errors found in junior, senior and university students are: The Use of Copula ‘Be’ Present Tense for Past Event in Junior Students, It does not find in Senior and University students’ composition. The errors such as additional ‘Be’ for Past Event and Omission “Be” for past event that found in Junior and Senior students, but it does not include in university students’ composition. The researcher found error. It is omission Errors in the Form of the Article (a, an, the) in Junior Students but It does not include in Senior and University’s composition. There are four causes that lead students to errors, they are overgeneralization, incomplete application of rules, false concept hypothesized, and ignorance of rule restrictions. For this case, ignorance of rule restrictions is the most highest cause of error that occured in the students’ writing with the percentage 114,74%. The error occured because the students fail to apply the rule of grammar in target language.id_ID
dc.language.isootherid_ID
dc.publisherSeminar Nasional Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya (SEMNAS KBSP) IV 2016id_ID
dc.titleA Comparative Study of Error Analysis in Writing Narrative Texts Made by Junior, Senior and University Studentsid_ID
dc.typeArticleid_ID


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record