Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
net/publication/316019575
CITATIONS READS
0 64
2 authors, including:
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Made Frida Yulia on 08 June 2018.
Abstract
Subject-verb agreement is an essential element to master by English Language
Education Study Program (ELESP) students, who are prepared to be English teachers
in the future. However, the researchers still find the fact that ELESP students make
the errors on the agreement. For that reason, it would be significant to find out the
errors made by the students as well as to discover the factors behind the errors.
To achieve those purposes, the researchers conducted a document analysis and a
semi-structure interview.The research results showed most of the errors belonged
to misinformation category (71.4%) and were subsequently followed by omission
category (17.9%) and addition category (10.7%). In addition, from the interview,
the researchers also found five (5) major factors that caused the students to make
the errors, namely interlingual error, ignorance of rule restrictions, incomplete
application of rules, false concepts hypothesized, and carelessness.
21
Students’ Subject-Verb Agreement Errors in Paragraph Writing Class
two research problems.Firstly,what are b. Errors: The Types and the Sources
subject-verb agreement errors that are made It is essential to classify errors based
by students in Paragraph Writing class of on the types because various errors may be
ELESP?Secondly, what are the factors that found in learners’ writing production. The
cause students in Paragraph Writing class of purpose is to make the researchers able to
ELESP to make those subject-verb agreement analyze the errors found in learners’ writing
errors? production easier.
Based on Surface Structure Taxonomy, errors
B. LITERARY REVIEW can be categorized into four types, namely
a. Subject-Verb Agreement omission, addition, misinformation, and
Some theorists propose their ideas on misordering (Dulay (1982) as cited in Ellis &
the concept of subject and verb agreement. Barkhuizen, 2005).
According to Wood (1981), the rule of subject- Researchers and linguists have
verb agreement states that a verb must agree thought about possible causes of errors
with its subject in number and in person. made by language learners. According to
Essentially, the subject may determine the Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005), in order to be
concord (Quirk & Greenbaum, 1973). Leech able to explain errors, people essentially
and Svartvik (1994) clarify that grammatical need to ask what processes learners invoke
concord indicates that certain grammatical when they do not understand the target-
items agree with each other. Thus, we may language form.In addition, they mention that
consider concord as an agreement. Leech and traditionally, there are two major processes
Svartvik (1994) further mention that there are identified: distinguishing interlingual
are two types of concord, namely concord of errorsand intralingual errors. Besides
number, for instance, as in singular: the film interlanguage errors and intralingual errors,
is and as in plural: the films are and concord there are other possible causes of errors
of person, for example, as in 1st person: I am made by learners. Those are carelessness,
and as in 2nd person: you are. translation and error as a part of language
Further concepts of the subject- creativity (Norrish, 1983) and context of
verb agreement are clarified. Quirk and learning (Brown, 1980).
Greenbaum (1973) state that “the selected
form of a verb, which permits a distinction C. METHODOLOGY
between singular and plural, depends on a. Participants
whether the subject is singular as in the man Thirty students in class B of Paragraph
makes, or plural as in the men make”(p. 11). Writing at ELESP in 2010/ 2011 academic
Greenbaum (1989) adds that the agreement year were chosen as the participants of the
of subject and verb is always applied research. It was due to the assumption that
whenever the verb displays distinctions in they were likely to make errors because as
number and in person. Greenbaum (1989) freshmen, they had limited knowledge in
further mentions that “for all verbs other producing English sentences. They were
than be, the distinctions only happen in only equipped with the theory of writing
Present Tense, where the third person from Basic Writing class in semester one.
singular has the –s form and the third person Furthermore, the selection of the participants
plural, which is like the first and the second was also based on the accessibility to the
persons, has the base form” (p. 208). participants, time, and financial reason.
22
LLT JOURNAL VOL. 15, NO. 2 ISSN 1410-7201
Number
Category Sub Category
No of Errors and Samples of Errors
of Errors of Errors
Its Percentage
The fragrance of the flower comfort everybody who
comes to my house. (singular marker –s for the verb
*comfort)
5
1. Omission - The garden has a lot of kinds of flowers, so it make
(17.9%)
my garden colorful and more beautiful to see.
(singular marker –s for the verb *make)
0
Regularization -
(0%)
It is located in an area which doesn’t has much
Double 1 pollutant, so the air is still fresh.(the negative marker
Marking (3.6%) for singular verb doesn’t *has)
23
Students’ Subject-Verb Agreement Errors in Paragraph Writing Class
Regularization 0 (0%) -
Each of the rooms also have to has some furnitures
which is needed.
(Incorrect use of the verb *have for the subject each
Mis- Archi Forms/ of the rooms, whose form is singular)
3. 20
information Alternating
(71.4%) The bedrooms has a beautiful view from the
Forms backyard.
(Inccorect form of the verb *has for the subject the
bedrooms, whose form is plural)
4. Misordering - 0 (0%) -
This is one of the examples of omission After analyzing the students’ written
errors category. work, the researchers only found one (1)
*The fragrance of the flower comfort error or 3.6% of the total errors regarded
everybody who comes to my house. as double-marking error, which is the
subcategory of addition error. According to
In sentence [1a], the omission error Dulay et al. (1982), an error is classified into
occurred in the verb *comfort because the double-marking category when a student
student did not apply the singular marker –s uses two items rather one, which are marked
in the verb *comfort in order to indicate that for the same feature. The error of this type
the verb has singular meaning. In sentence could be seen in sentence [2a].
[1a], the subject, the fragrance of the flower,
is considered singular because the head [1a] *It is located in an area which doesn’t
subject, the fragrance, is considered an has much pollutant, so the air is still
uncountable noun, which belongs to gases fresh.
category (Azar, 1989, p. 206). According to Sentence [2a] is a deviant form of sentence:
Langan (1996), words that come between [2b] It is located in an area which doesn’t
the subject and the verb in a sentence do not have much pollutant, so the air is
change the subject-verb agreement within still fresh.
the sentence. Moreover, since the word,
thefragrance,belongs to uncountable noun, In sentence [2a] the double-marking
it has singular meaning. Greenbaum (1989) error occurred in the negative form *doesn’t
states that non-count nouns are considered has of the subject, an area. In sentence [2a],
singular. the student used the same features, which
Thus, in order to form a correct are all singular form, to indicate the negative
subject-verb agreement in sentence [1a], the meaning: doesn’t and has. The student should
student should apply the singular marker –s, have used a plural form, have, after the word
for the verb, *comfort. It aimed to indicate doesn’t, so the subject-verb agreement in
that the verb has singular meaning, so number could be made.
the subject-verb agreement in number in Besides, the researchers also found
sentence [1a] could be formed. Therefore, two (2) errors or 7.1% of the total errors
the correction of sentence [1a] is: on simple addition, which is still another
subcategory of addition error category.
[1b] The fragrance of the flower comforts According to Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005), an
everybody who comes to my house. error can be classified under simple addition
category when the addition error does not
24
LLT JOURNAL VOL. 15, NO. 2 ISSN 1410-7201
involve regularization, which can happen errors or 71.4% of the total errors. Sentence
because “a marker is erroneously added to [4a] becomes an example of these archi/
exceptional items of the given class that does alternating forms.
not take a marker” (Dulay et al., 1982, p. 156) [3a] *The bedrooms has a beautiful view
and double-marking error, which can happen from the backyard.
because of two items marked for the same
feature (Dulay et al., 1982). Thus, the learner The error in sentence [4a] might
might make some simple addition errors happen because the student used the singular
because they simply added a feature that verb, has, which should not follow the plural
actually should not be put in a sentence. The subject of sentence [4a], the bedrooms.
researchers provide an example of simple The subject-verb agreement in number of
addition error found in the students’ written sentence [4a] could be formed only if the
work. student had applied the plural verb, have, in
order to follow the plural subject. Therefore,
[2a] *The living room has a window, sentence [4b]; the bedrooms have a beautiful
when we open the window in the view from the backyard, becomes the
morning, the ray of the sun will correction of sentence [4a].
shining brightly through the window
and touch our skin. b. The Factors that Caused the Students
The simple addition error in sentence to Make the Errors
[4a] occurred in the word *shining, whose From the interview, the researchers
position after the modal auxiliary, will (Leech could find five (5) major factors that caused
& Svartvik, 1994, p. 244). Leech and Svartvik students to make subject-verb agreement
(1994) state that modal auxiliaries only have errors. Those factors were interlingual error,
one form and do not have such forms as –s ignorance of rule restrictions, incomplete
forms, –ing forms, or –ed participles. Further, application of rules, false concepts
Azar and Hagen (2006) mention that modal hypothesized, and carelessness.
auxiliaries come in front of the simple form
i. Interlingual Error
of a main verb. Accordingly, sentence [3a]
According to Ellis and Barkhuizen
should be:
(2005), interlingual errors are the result
[3b] The living room has a window, when of mother tongue influences (p. 65).In the
we open the window in the morning, interview, most of the respondents admitted
the ray of the sun will shine brightly that the errors on subject-verb agreement
through the window and touch our could happen because they were still
skin. influenced by their mother tongue, which
Under misinformation category, is Indonesian language. Some respondents
which may happen because of the use of an stated that they have been accustomed
incorrect form of a morpheme or structure to Indonesian sentences, which does not
(Ellis & Barkhuizen, 2005), the researchers require them to apply the complicated rules
did not find any errors on regularization. as what they have to apply in writing English
Nevertheless, the researchers found many sentences.
subject-verb agreement errors that belonged In addition, when the respondents
to another subcategory of misinformation, wrote an Indonesian sentence, they did not
namely archi/alternating forms. There need to think about whether the subject was
were twenty (20) archi/alternating forms singular or plural, whether to use simple
25
Students’ Subject-Verb Agreement Errors in Paragraph Writing Class
26
LLT JOURNAL VOL. 15, NO. 2 ISSN 1410-7201
27
Students’ Subject-Verb Agreement Errors in Paragraph Writing Class
respondents to continue making the same Dulay, H., Burt, M., and Krashen, S. (1982).
errors as what they had done. Language Two. New York: Oxford
Besides the lack of feedback given University Press, Inc.
by their lecturer to the errors they made, Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second
most of the respondents also conveyed that Language Acquisition. New York:
the lack of motivation which was caused by Oxford University Press.
themselves might also cause them to make Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language
errors on subject-verb agreement.Most of Acquisition. New York: Oxford
the respondents argued that having many University Press.
assignments, with short time to finish, Ellis, R. and Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analysing
become the factor that could decrease their Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford
motivation to finish their assignments very University Press.
well. In addition, they thought that they Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E. (2009). How
could not finish doing the assignments well to Design and Evaluate Research in
in that short time. Thus, they tended to finish Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
doing them carelessly. In addition, most Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., Borg, W. R. (2007).
of the respondents also agreed that their Educational Research An Introduction
unwillingness to recheck the sentences after (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education,
they had finished writing them could become Inc.
a factor behind the subject-verb agreement Greenbaum, S. (1989). A College Grammar of
errors in their written work. English. New York: Longman Inc.
Langan, J. (1996). College Writing Skills
E. CONCLUSIONS (4th ed.).New York: The McGraw-Hill
The research firmly stated that the Companies, Inc.
students in the class still made a number Leech, G. and Svartvik, J. (1994). A
of subject-verb agreement errors in their Communicative Grammar of English.
writing. Misinformation, omission and London: Longman Group Limited.
addition became the major category of McDonough, J. and McDonough, S. (2004).
errors frequently made by the students. Research Methods for English Language
Those errors were caused by five major Teachers. London: Arnold.
factors, namely interlingual error, ignorance Norrish, J. (1983). Language Learners and
of rule restrictions, incomplete application Their Errors. Hong Kong: The Macmillan
of rules, false concepts hypothesized, and Press Limited.
carelessness. Ouirk, R. and Greenbaum, S. (1973). A
University Grammar of English. Essex:
REFERENCES Longman.
Azar, B. S. (1989). Understanding and Using Richards, J. C. (1974). Error Analysis. London:
English Grammar (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Longman Group Limited.
Prentice Hall Regents. Wood, F. T. (1981). Current English Usage.
Azar, B. S. and Hagen S. A. (2006). Basic London: The Macmillan Press Limited.
English Grammar (3rd ed.). New York:
Pearson Longman.
28