AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS OF ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS

AT SMK MUHAMMADIYAH 2 SURAKARTA 2015/2016 ACADEMIC YEAR

PUBLICATION ARTICLE

Submitted as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Getting Bachelor Degree of Education

in English Department

Proposed by

AULIYA NURISHMA A 320120188

DEPARTEMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION SCHOOL OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF SURAKARTA 2016

ii

iii

v

1

AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS OF ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS AT SMK MUHAMMADIYAH 2 SURAKARTA 2015/2016 ACADEMIC YEAR

ABSTRAK

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah: (1) untuk menjelaskan kesalahan yang dibuat oleh siswa kelas XI SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta dalam menulis teks deskriptif, (2) mengidentifikasi jenis kesalahan leksikal, kesalahan tata bahasa, dan kesalahan tulisan dan juga menjelaskan frekuensi dari setiap jenis kesalahan, dan (3) mendeskripsikan jenis dominan kesalahan, dan mengidentifikasi sumber-sumber kesalahan. Peneliti menggunakan penelitian kualitatif karena peneliti tidak menetapkan hipotesis dan mengujinya tetapi fokus pada analisis setelah mengambil data. Peneliti menggunakan metode elisitasi dalam penelitiannya untuk mendapatkan data. Subjek penelitian adalah siswa kelas XI SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta. Peneliti mengambil salah pada teks deskriptif siswa kelas XI untuk objek penelitian dari lembar kerja 31 siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptif. Peneliti menemukan jenis kesalahan berdasarkan data, mereka leksikal, tata bahasa dan tulisan. (1) tingkat kesalahan leksikal adalah 35 kesalahan (10,54%), (2) tingkat kesalahan tata bahasa adalah 268 kesalahan (80,72%), dan (3) tingkat kesalahan tulisan adalah 29 kesalahan (8,75% ). Kesalahan tertinggi yang peserta didik dibuat dalam misordering frase kata benda dengan total kesalahan adalah 29 kesalahan (8,73%). Kata kunci: analisis kesalahan, teks deskriptif, sumber kesalahan.

ABSTRACT

The aims of this research are: (1) to describe errors made by eleventh grade students of SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta in their writing descriptive texts, (2) identifying the types of lexical errors, grammatical errors, and discourse errors and also explain the frequency of each type of errors, and (3) describing the dominant type of errors, and identifying the sources of errors. The researcher uses qualitative research because the researcher do not set hypothesis and test it but focus on analyzing after taking the data. The researcher uses elicitation method in her research to get the data. The subject of the research is the eleventh grade students of SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta. The researcher takes erroneous on descriptive texts of eleventh grade student for the object of the research from 31 student’s worksheet in writing descriptive texts. The researcher found the type of errors based on the data, they are lexical, grammatical and discourse. (1) the lexical errors level is 35 errors (10,54%), (2) the grammatical errors level is 268 errors (80,72%), and (3) the discourse errors level is 29 errors (8,75%). The highest errors that the learners made is in misordering noun phrase with the total errors is 29 errors (8,73%). Key words: errors analysis, descriptive text, sources of errors.

2

1. INTRODUCTION

English is an international language which is very important to be mastered well. The national curriculum of Indonesia had undergone change several times. The latest curriculum of KTSP 2006 (School Based Curriculum) was applied in Indonesia. Changing curriculum had affected the national education system of Indonesia, it had not only affected the learning climate in the classroom but also the readiness of the principle and subject teachers in effort to understand and apply curriculum in practice. SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta is one of vocational high school in Surakarta getting many achievements in academic and non-academic aspects. SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta uses curriculum of KTSP 2006 (School Based Curriculum) as the Indonesia government had applied. When the researcher teach in teaching apprentice (PPL), researcher found weaknesses of students in English, especially in writing. They were able to speak but wrong in writing. Therefore, the researcher concluded that students are not synchronized between speaking and writing.

The researcher found many cases of errors in writing skill from eleventh grande students at SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta. These are the examples of erroneous: I was bon in Surakarta. The example shows that the word bon is incorrect. The learner actually wants to write born but she made mistakes in spelling. This error called wrong spelling. From these examples, the researcher decides to analyze the students error in SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta in their writing ability entitled An Error Analysis on Descriptive Texts of Eleventh Grade Students at SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta 2015/2016 Academic Year.

According to James (1998: 78), if the learner is inclined and able to correct a fault in his or her output, it is assumed that the form he or she selected was not the one intended and that fault is a mistake. If, on the other hand, the learner is unable or in any way disinclined to make the corection, we assumed that the form the learner used was the one intended and that is an error.

There are five previous studies in this research. The previous studies are taken from five researchers they are: (1) Rizky Edo Pratama (2015) entitled An Error Analysis in Writing Descriptive Text Made by Eighth Grade Students of SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Masaran in 2014/2015 Academic Years, (2) Hestuningtyas Maharani Perdana (2015), the title of her research is Comparative Error Analysis in Writing Recount Text Made by The First and The Third Semester Students of English Department UMS 2014/2015 Academic Year, (3) Hendita Leila Rahma (2015), the title of her research is Errors in Spoken Production Made by Students in Microteaching Class of Departement of English Education of Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta in 2013/2014 Academic Year, (4) Rismanita Ayu Eka Saputri (2015) with her title Error Analysis of Oral Production Made by English Departement Students in Microteaching Class at Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta and (5) Retno Widiastutik (UMS, 2015) with her title Error Analysis on Descriptive Texts Made by The Eighth Grade Students at SMP N 2 Colomadu in 2014/2015 Academic Year. The differences between this research and previous research are in the subject and object of the research and also the frequency of each type of errors and in the dominant type of error.

Derived from the previous study, the difference is very clear in this research is revealing why students are less interested and do not like the English because of the absence intensivity between teachers and students. Very unfortunate if students actually interested in English but they are not accompanied by the teacher writing because of their lack of knowledge. Teachers should further increase the intensity of learning. 2. RESEARCH METHOD

The researcher uses qualitative research because the researcher do not set hypothesis and test it but focus on analyzing after taking the data. The subject of the research is the eleventh grade students of SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta. It consist of 31 students taken from XI Office Administration Affairs (AP), Accountancy (AK), and Marketing (PM) class. The average of student’s age is 16 up to 17 years old and their background of language is Indonesia. The researcher takes erroneous on descriptive texts of eleventh grade student for the object of the research from 31 student’s worksheet in writing descriptive texts. The observation is done by the writer in teaching learning process during on January 08th – 11th, 2016. The researcher uses elicitation method in her research to get the data. The techniques for analyzing data taken from Fauziati’s (2009) for description, James’ theory (1998) for classification, Dulay , et al.’s (1982), and Brown’s (1993) for sources of errors.

3

3. FINDING AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Finding In this part the researcher founds four major aspects of research finding, namely, the types of

error, frequency of error, dominant type of error and sources of errors. The researcher found the type of errors based on the data, they are lexical, grammatical and

discourse. The lexical level which is divided into three, namely, wrong spelling consist of 12 errors or 3,61%, code switching consists of 8 errors or 2,40% and false friend consists of 35 errors or 10,54%. Next, the type of errors in the grammatical level divided into eight types. First, the use of verb tense which is divided into four, they are: Omission (s/es) for 3rd person singular consist of 14 errors or 4,2%, omission of has/have consist of 6 errors or 1,80%, misselection of verb consist of 5 errors or 1,50% and misuses of (verb) in simple present tense consist of 13 errors or 3,91% . Second, the use of noun which is divided into two, they are: omission of (‘s) in possessive form consist of 16 errors or 4,81% and omission of (-s) of plural marker consist of 5 errors or 1,50%. Third, Be which is divided into three, they are: addition of Be in the present tense consists of 5 errors or 150%, omission of Be as predicate consist of 27 errors 8,13% and misuses of Be consist of 21 errors or 6,32%. Fourth, pronoun which is divided into three, they are: misuses of subjective pronoun consist 8 errors or 2,40%, misuses of objective pronoun consist 9 errors or 2,71% and misuses of possessive adjective pronoun consist 11 errors or 3,31%. Fifth is misordering noun phrase, there is 29 errors or 6,92%. Sixth, article which is divided ito two, they are: omission of article consist of 10 errors or 3,01% and addition of article consist of 6 errors or 1,80%. Seventh, omission of preposition consist of 7 errors or 2,10%. Eighth, omission of conjunction consist of 12 errors or 3,61%. The discourse level the researcher found three types of errors they are: generic structure is 9 errors or 2,71%, language feature is 9 errors or 2,71% and reference is 11 errors or 3,31%.

Below the table of type of errors and the dominant type of errors found on the data.

No The Types of Errors Number Percentage

1 Grammatical: a. The Use of Verb Tense:

a) Omission (s/es) for 3rd person singular

b) Omission of Has/Have

c) Misselection of verb

d) Misuses of (verb) in simple present tense

268 38

14 6 5 13

80,72%

b. The Use of Noun

a) Omission of (‘s) in possessive form

b) Omission of (-s) of plural marker

21 16 5

c. BE a) Addition of BE in the present tense b) Omission of BE as predicate c) Misuses of BE

53 5 27 21

d. Pronoun a) Misuses of subjective pronoun b) Misuses of objective pronoun c) Misuses of possessive adjective pronoun

28 8 9 11

e. Phrase a) Misordering noun phrase

29 29

f. Article a) Omission of article b) Addition of article

16 10 6

g. Preposition a) Omission of preposition

7 7

h. Conjunction a) Omission of conjunction

12 12

4

2 Discourse:

a. Generic Structure

b. Languange Feature

c. Reference

29 9 9 11

8,73%

3 Lexical: a. Wrong Spelling b. The use of Indonesian word c. False Friend

35 12 8 35

10,54%

The total of errors 332 100%

Based on the table, the researcher finds that the total number of errors are 332 errors and can

divided into 23 types of errors. The total percentage of each types in linguistic level are: (1) the lexical errors level is 35 errors (10,54%), (2) the grammatical errors level is 268 errors (80,72%), and (3) the discourse errors level is 29 errors (8,75%). The highest errors that the learners made is in misordering noun phrase with the total errors is 29 errors (8,73%).

Based on the table of frequency of errors and dominant type of errors, the researcher finds two sources of errors, they are interlingual transfer and intralingual transfer. Interlingual transfer is caused by interference of the learner’s mother tongue. Learner transfers items from their native language to the foreign language learning. Intralingual transfer belongs to language being learned of the native language. The foreign language can be caused of errors because the learners transfer some rules in the foreign language as the native language.

3.2 Discussion The similarities and the differences of the findings between the writer and the previous finding

are explained briefly on the table below:

The similarities between current and previous finding

The Similarities Aspect

Current Finding Pratama Perdana Rahma Saputri Widiatutik

Types of Error

Lexical

Grammatical

Wrong spelling

The use of Indonesian word

False friend

- Similar in meaning

The use of verb

- Omission (s/es) for 3rd person singular

- Misselection of verb

The use of noun

- Omission of (-s) of plural marker

BE

Wrong spelling

Code switching

False friend

- Similar in meaning

- V1 without s/es for 3rd person singular

- The wrong form of V1 for 3rd person

Wrong spelling in the word

- Omission of bound morpheme (-s) as plural marker

- Omission of bound morpheme (-s) as plural marker

Wrong spelling

Code switching

- V1 without (-s) for 3rd person singular

- The wrong form of V1 for 3rd person singular

5

Discourse

- Addition of Be in the present tense

- Omission of Be as predicate

- Misuses of Be

Phrase

- Misordering noun phrase

Article

- Omission of article

- Addition of article

Preposition

- Omission of preposition

Conjuction

- Omission of conjuction

Generic structure

Language feature

Reference

- Addition of Be in the present tense

- Omission of Be as predicate

- The use of Be

- Misordering

- Omission of article

- Addition of article

Generic structure

Reference

- Omission of definite/indefinite

- Omission of preposition

- Omission of conjuction

- Omission of preposition

- Addition of Be in the present tense

- Omission of Be as predicate

- The use of Be

- Misordering

- Addition of article

Generic structure

Language feature

Reference

6

The differences between current and previous finding

The Similarities Aspect

Current Finding Pratama Perdana Rahma Saputri Widiatutik

Types of Error

Lexical

Grammatical

Discourse

False friend

- Literal translation of Indonesia

The use of verb

- Omission of has/have

- Misuses of (verb) in simple tense

The use of noun

- Omision of (‘s) in possessive form

BE

Pronoun

- Misuses of subjective pronoun

- Misuses of objective pronoun

- Misuses of possessive adjective pronoun

- The use of gerund

- Pronoun from subjective for objective

- Pronoun from possessive for subjective

- Addition of subjective pronoun

- Omission of possessive pronoun

- Omission of subjective pronoun

- Wrong selection pronoun

- The use V1 for gerund

- Wrong selection of BE

- Subjective for possessive pronoun

- The wrong selection of pronoun

- Omission of possessive

- Possessive for subjective pronoun

- Addition of possessive

- Subjective for objective pronoun

- The wrong form of relative clause

Conjuction

4. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

4.1 Conclusion The researcher uses James’ theory (1998) for describing the errors on desciptive texts of

eleventh grade students at SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta. There are four major taxonomies for analyzing the errors, namely, linguistic category, surface strategy taxonomy, comparative taxonomy, and communicative effect taxonomy. The researcher classifies the errors based on combination

7

between linguistic category and surface strategy taxonomy. Then, the researcher uses Brown’s theory (1994) for explaining sources of errors. There are three major types of sources of errors, namely, interlingual transfer, intralingual transfer, and context of leaning (Brown, 1994: 213-215).

After analyzing the data, the researcher classifies the data based on types of error, frequency of error, dominant types of error, and sources of error. There are 23 types of errors which divided into three major types they are lexical error, grammatical error, and discourse error.

After analyzing the types of error, the researcher finds and identifies dominant types of error for the sources of error which made by the learners. Sources of errors based on Brown theory divided into three, they are interlingual transfer, intralingual transfer, and context of learning. The dominant types of error that is in misordering noun phrase with the total errors is 29 errors (8,73%) and two sources of errors they are interlingual transfer and intralingual transfer.

The result of the study shows that the students produce 332 errorneous sentences taken from 31 student’s descriptive text, they are lexical, grammatical and discourse. The lexical level which is divided into three, namely, wrong spelling consist of 12 errors or 3,61%, code switching consists of 8 errors or 2,40% and false friend consists of 35 errors or 10,54%. Next, the type of errors in the grammatical level divided into eight types. First, the use of verb tense which is divided into four, they are: Omission (s/es) for 3rd person singular consist of 14 errors or 4,2%, omission of has/have consist of 6 errors or 1,80%, misselection of verb consist of 5 errors or 1,50% and misuses of (verb) in simple present tense consist of 13 errors or 3,91% . Second, the use of noun which is divided into two, they are: omission of (‘s) in possessive form consist of 16 errors or 4,81% and omission of (-s) of plural marker consist of 5 errors or 1,50%. Third, Be which is divided into three, they are: addition of Be in the present tense consists of 5 errors or 150%, omission of Be as predicate consist of 27 errors 8,13% and misuses of Be consist of 21 errors or 6,32%. Fourth, pronoun which is divided into three, they are: misuses of subjective pronoun consist 8 errors or 2,40%, misuses of objective pronoun consist 9 errors or 2,71% and misuses of possessive adjective pronoun consist 11 errors or 3,31%. Fifth is misordering noun phrase, there is 29 errors or 6,92%. Sixth, article which is divided ito two, they are: omission of article consist of 10 errors or 3,01% and addition of article consist of 6 errors or 1,80%. Seventh, omission of preposition consist of 7 errors or 2,10%. Eighth, omission of conjunction consist of 12 errors or 3,61%. The discourse level the researcher found three types of errors they are: generic structure is 9 errors or 2,71%, language feature is 9 errors or 2,71% and reference is 11 errors or 3,31%.

One of the goals of error analysis deals with helping to construct an account of the second language learner’s linguistic competence. After doing this research, the researcher gets more knowledge about analyzing learner’s errors. The importance of understanding learner errors are it can helps the learners for understanding their second language which they learn and identifying the learner’s linguistic difficulties. Errors analysis can be used to determine what the learners need on the teaching learning process. Studying errors helps the teacher understanding what subject which is difficult to comprehend and how they make errors. The importance of conducting errors analysis are firstly, by conducting errors analysis the teachers get more knowledge about student’s errors in the teaching learning process so that they know how to solve the problems. Secondly, errors can tell the teachers how far the students need in explaining the materials, especially in linguistics. Thirdly, errors analysis has influenced the syllabus design of teaching-learning process. Errors is an important component of syllabus design because errors are significant data for syllabus designers as they show what items are important to be included or which items need to be recycled in the syllabus. The importance of remedial teaching is helping the learners to understand about materials or subject. Errors analysis can be used for remedial teaching with some stages such as giving daily exercise, focusing on the subject in which the learners made errors, locating the errors or learning difficulties and discovering the causal factors of why the learners made errors.

4.2 Suggestion

After analyzing the data, the researcher gives suggestion concerning with the research paper entitled “An Error Analysis on Descriptive Texts of Eleventh Grade Students at SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Surakarta 2015/2016 Academic Year”. The researcher allows some suggestions for English teachers should emphasizes on wording English pattern and explains that every sentence has different structure. Then, the teachers could give more homeworks or assignments to make the

8

learners practice their skill and for other researcher can improve their ability to investigate the errors in their errors study, especially when they analyze error in writing other type of texts.

5. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brown, H. Douglas. 1994. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Prentice Hall Regrets.

Djuharie, Otong Setiawan. 2007. Genre. Bandung: CV. Yrama Widya.

Fauziati, Endang. 2009. Readings on Applied Linguistics: A Handbook for Language Teacher and Teacher Researcher. Surakarta: Era Pustaka Utama.

Fauziati, Endang. 2010. Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFl). Surakarta: Era Pustaka Utama.

James, Carl. 1998. Errors in Language Learning and Use: Exploring Errors Analysis. New York: Longman.