A STUDY ON THE MASTERY AND THE ERRORS OF REPORTED SPEECH
A Thesis
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain theSarjanaPendidikanDegree
in English Language Education
By
Andreas Grahana Puspitasari Student Number: 021214028
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
A STUDY ON THE MASTERY AND THE ERRORS OF REPORTED SPEECH
A Thesis
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain theSarjanaPendidikanDegree
in English Language Education
By
Andreas Grahana Puspitasari Student Number: 021214028
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
This thesis is dedicated to my beloved mother, father, brother, sister,
and Fandi
for their love, support, motivation, and prayer
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to dedicate my greatest and deepest gratitude to Allah SWT for His everlasting love and guidance throughout the accomplishment of this thesis. He is the strength of my soul and the most faithful companion.
My deepest appreciation goes to my major sponsor, Agustinus Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A., and my co-sponsor, Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd., for their great patience to spend their time in reading and correcting this thesis continually. Their advice and suggestions are useful to give me inputs to the revision of this thesis.
My sincere appreciation also goes to Laurentia Sumarni, S.Pd., for her willingness to spend her precious time to read, to guide and to correct this thesis for further improvement.
My deepest gratitude goes to all lecturers of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University for their guidance during my study. I also thank them all for their precious time to give me valuable lessons and enrich me with knowledge and learning experiences.
My sincere appreciation goes to Dra. Sri Joeliantini for her willingness to give me permission to conduct the research in her Structure IV classes.
I owe thanks to the fourth semester students of Structure IV classes (class B and class D) in the academic year of 2006/2007 for their willingness to spend their time to be the respondents of this research.
I would like to give my deepest love and appreciation to my beloved parents, Anik Endriati and Pitoyo, for giving me their constant love and guidance and making these all happen. I cannot thank them all enough for all their love, prayers, support,
and faith. I thank my brother and my sister, Madra and Leny, for their support and laughter. I am proud of them.
I would like to take this opportunity to give my special thanks to Fandi for always encouraging me not to give up and to finish this thesis immediately. I thank him for always encouraging me to be a tough girl.
It is proper to say thanks to Rury for lending me her computer and printer. I also thankMbakWiji and MasWoro for their willingness to lend me their computer. My special thanks go to my friend Uningtyas Guno Tali Kusumawati for her patience in picking me up and for lending me her computer and printer.
I deliver my best thanks to Haryana and Tina, for their companionship and support during the process of the accomplishment of this paper. I am deeply indebted to Agatha Uni and Melania Shinta for their willingness to check the test. I thank Dudi (PBI 2003) and Nyoman (Management 2002) for their support.
To Sari, Dianing, Feri, Selly, Nissa, Marinta, Woro, Shinta ‘ciplux’, Hastri and all PBI 2002ers, seniors and juniors, I thank them all for their advice, suggestions, inputs, and support. My best thanks also go to Uning cuaem, Uthe’ muaniezt,Mbak Reni and Mas Anto’, Mbak Rangga, Heni, Diah, Yuni, Intan, and Sri. I thank them all for their love, support, stories, lessons, and for being my good friends during this time.
Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to those whose names I cannot mention here one by one. I cannot finish this thesis without their assistance, supports, and prayers. May God bless them all!
Andreas Grahana Puspitasari
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE ... i
PAGE OF APPROVAL ... ii
PAGE OF ACCEPTANCE ... iii
PAGE OF DEDICATION ... iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ... vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... viii
LIST OF TABLES ... xiv
LIST OF FIGURES ... xv
ABSTRACT ... xvi
ABSTRAK ... xviii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ... 1
A. Background of the Study ... 1
B. Problem Limitation ... 4
C. Problem Formulation ... 4
D. Objectives ... 5
E. Benefits ... 5
F. Definition of Terms ... 6
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW... 9
A. Theoretical Description ... 9
1. Direct Speech ... 9
a. Definition ... 9
b. Punctuation ... 10
1). Colon ... 10
2). Comma ... 10
3). Quotation Marks ... 11
2. Reported Speech ... 11
a. Definition ... 11
b. Types of Reported Speech ... 12
1). Statement ... 12
2). Question ... 12
3). Command or Imperative... 13
4). Request ... 14
5). Advice and Suggestion... 14
6). Exclamation ... 14
c. Punctuation ... 15
d. Conjunctionthat... 15
e. Reporting Verbs (Say, Tell, Ask) ... 16
1). Say... 16
2). Tell ... 16
3). Ask... 16
f. Grammatical Changes ... 17
1). Tense ... 17
2). Pronoun ... 19
3). Adverb ... 19
4). ThisandThese ... 20
5). Modal Verbs ... 20
6). Modal Auxiliary ... 21
7). Word Order ... 21
8). General Truth ... 22
9). To-Infinitive andThat-Clause ... 22
3. Errors ... 23
a. Definition ... 23
b. The Purpose of the Study of Errors ... 23
c. Errors versus Mistakes ... 24
d. Classifications of Errors ... 25
1). Linguistic Category ... 25
2). Surface Strategy ... 25
3). Comparative Taxonomy ... 27
4). Communicative Effect ... 28
e. Sources of Errors ... 28
1). Interlingual Transfer ... 28
2). Intralingual Transfer ... 29
3). Context of Learning ... 29
B. Theoretical Framework ... 29
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ... 32
A. Research Method ... 32
B. Research Participants ... 32
C. Research Setting ... 33
D. Research Instrument ... 33
1. Validity ... 34
a. Content Validity ... 34
b. Criterion-Related Evidence of Validity ... 35
c. Construct Validity ... 36
d. Face Validity ... 36
2. Reliability ... 36
E. Data Gathering Technique ... 38
F. Data Analysis ... 39
1. Checking and Scoring ... 39
2. Classifying ... 39
G. Research Procedure ... 40
CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 41
A. Data Presentation ... 41
B. Data Analysis ... 43
1. The Reliability of the Test ... 44
2. Presentation of Descriptive Statistics ... 44
C. Discussion ... 47
1. The Students' Mastery on Reported Speech ... 47
2. The Types of Errors Found in Reported Speech ... 47
a. The Types of Errors Based on the Error Classifications Proposed by Dulay et al. ... 48
1). Omission ... 49
2). Addition ... 51
3). Misformation ... 53
4). Misordering ... 54
b. The Types of Errors Based on the Grammatical Changes of Reported Speech ... 55
1). Tense ... 56
2). Pronoun ... 57
3). Adverb of Time ... 57
4). Adverb of Place ... 58
5). ThisandThese ... 58
6). Modal Verb ... 59
7). Word Order ... 59
8). To-Infinitive ... 60
9). That-Clause ... 61
c. The Types of Errors Based on the Types of Reported Speech ... 61
1). Question ... 62
2). Command ... 62
3). Exclamation ... 63
d. Other Findings ... 63
3. Possible Causes of Students' Errors in Reported Speech ... 64
a. Interlingual Transfer ... 64
b. Intralingual Transfer ... 66
c. Context of Learning ... 67
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 69
A. Conclusions ... 69
B. Suggestions ... 71
1. For the Lecturers of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University ... 71
2. For the Students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University ... 74
3. For the Further Research ... 74
REFERENCES ... 76
APPENDICES ... 78
APPENDIX 1 Reported Speech Test ... 78
APPENDIX 2 Answer Key ... 82
APPENDIX 3 Error Types Based on Linguistic Category Classification ... 83
APPENDIX 4 Error Types Based on Surface Strategy Classification ... 86
APPENDIX 5 The Blue Print of the Grammatical Changes in the Test ... 89
APPENDIX 6 The Reliability of the Half and the Full Test ... 90
APPENDIX 7 The Students’ Scores in the Test ... 92
APPENDIX 8 Multiple-Choice Test - Part A ... 94
APPENDIX 9 Filling in the Blank Test - Part B ... 96
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 The Changes of Adverbial Time in Reported Speech ... 20
Table 3.1 The Blue Print of the Reported Speech Types in the Test ... 35
Table 3.2 The Reliability of the Test ... 38
Table 4.1 The Students’ Achievement in the Whole Part of the Test ... 42
Table 4.2 The Students’ Achievement in the First Part of the Test ... 42
Table 4.3 The Students’ Achievement in the Second Part of the Test ... 43
Table 4.4 The Descriptive Statistics ... 44
Table 4.5 The Students’ Scores in Relation to the Category ... 46
Table 4.6 Reported Speech Errors Found in the Test Based on the Surface Strategy Taxonomy ... 49
Table 4.7 Reported Speech Errors Found in the Test Based on the Grammatical Changes of Reported Speech ... 55
Table 4.8 Reported Speech Errors Found in the Test Based on the Types of Reported Speech ... 61
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 The Tenses Movement in Reported Speech ... 18
Figure 2.2 The Shifts of Modal Auxiliary in Reported Speech ... 21
Figure 3.1 The Pearson Product Moment Formula ... 37
Figure 3.2 The Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula ... 37
Figure 4.1 The Score Category ... 46
ABSTRACT
Puspitasari, Andreas Grahana. 2007. A Study on the Mastery and the Errors of Reported Speech. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.
Students often found reported speech to be a problematic area of English grammar because their language, Indonesian, has less formal distinction between direct speech and reported speech than that of English. For this reason, they often made errors when they were required to convert direct speech into reported speech. In fact, since reported speech is a part of English grammar, students have to master it in order to be able to produce correct utterances. Moreover, as they belong to students of Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, they are prepared and expected to be teachers. They have to master English grammar so that they are able to give correct explanation to their students later on. There were three problems formulated in this study. They were 1) ‘How far have the fourth semester students mastered reported speech?’ 2) ‘What types of errors do the students make in reported speech?’ and 3) ‘What are the possible causes of students’ errors in reported speech?’ The research was conducted using a survey method whose participants were the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. To select the representative sample, this study applied cluster sampling technique. A test was used as an instrument to collect the data.
The answer to the first problem was that the fourth semester students' mastery on reported speech was sufficient according to the academic regulation of Sanata Dharma University. Their average achievement score was 19.60, which fell on the maximum passing score for the category of sufficient (17-20). It was found out that the students had difficulties in mastering reported speech especially when they were required to convert direct speech into reported speech with no option (in part B-Filling in the Blanks). In the first part of the test (in part A-Multiple-Choice), the students could achieve 76.92% of correct answers. However, they only achieved 42.12% of correct answers in the second part of the test (in part B-Filling in the Blanks). This achievement was far below the minimum standard of mastery (56%).
The answer to the second problem was that the students made many errors of reported speech. Based on the surface strategy taxonomy, errors found were 51 which divided into 10 errors of omission of major content (19.61%), 4 errors of omission of grammatical morpheme (7.84%), 2 errors of double marking (3.92%), 17 errors of simple addition (33.33%), 5 errors of alternating form (9.80%), and 13 errors of misordering (25.49%). Based on the grammatical changes of reported speech, students made the highest errors (354) which consisted of 97 errors of tense (27.40%), 29 errors of pronoun (8.19%), 154 errors of adverbial time (43.50%), 19 errors of adverbial place (5.37%), 10 errors of demonstrativesthisandthese(2.82%), 1 error of modal verb (0.28%), 14 errors of word order (3.95%), 2 errors of to-infinitive (0.56%), and 28 errors of that-clause (7.91%). The students also made 33 errors of the types of reported speech. They made 11 errors of reported question (33.33%), 17 errors of reported command (51.51%), and 5 errors of reported exclamation (15.15%).
The answer to the third problem was that the students’ errors were caused by the interference of the mother tongue, Indonesian, the nature of reported speech, and the context of learning with the lecturer and the material.
Related to the research findings, this study proposes some suggestions. First, the lecturers of the English Language Education Study Program are recommended to give special time to teach reported speech step by step continuously because of its complexity. Second, the students should be more active and creative to learn reported speech outside the class so that they can minimise their errors and improve their mastery. Third, the further researchers are recommended to develop the study using different subjects and using not only test but also observation and interview as the instruments.
ABSTRAK
Puspitasari, Andreas Grahana. 2007. A Study on the Mastery and the Errors of Reported Speech. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.
Mahasiswa sering mengalami kesulitan dalam menguasai kalimat tak langsung Bahasa Inggris karena Bahasa Indonesia hanya memiliki sedikit perbedaan antara kalimat langsung dan kalimat tak langsung dibandingkan perbedaan dalam Bahasa Inggris. Oleh karena itu, mereka sering membuat kesalahan ketika mereka diminta untuk mengubah kalimat langsung menjadi kalimat tak langsung. Padahal, kalimat tak langsung merupakan bagian dari Bahasa Inggris yang harus dikuasai mahasiswa untuk dapat berbahasa Inggris dengan benar. Lebih-lebih mereka adalah mahasiswa Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan yang disiapkan dan diharapkan untuk menjadi pendidik yang bisa memberikan penjelasan yang benar kepada siswa-siswanya kelak. Studi ini merumuskan tiga masalah, yaitu 1) ‘Sejauh mana mahasiswa semester empat Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris menguasai kalimat tak langsung?’ 2) ‘Kesalahan-kesalahan apa saja yang dibuat mahasiswa dalam kalimat tak langsung?’ dan 3) ‘Kemungkinan-kemungkinan apa saja yang menjadi penyebab kesalahan mahasiswa itu?’
Penelitian ini dilaksanakan dengan menggunakan metode survei dimana mahasiswa semester empat Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris menjadi partisipannya. Studi ini menggunakan metode cluster sampling dalam memilih partisipan. Instrumen yang digunakan dalam memperoleh data adalah tes.
Jawaban untuk masalah yang pertama yaitu bahwa berdasarkan Peraturan Akademik Universitas Sanata Dharma, mahasiswa semester empat dianggap telah cukup menguasai kalimat tak langsung. Skor rata-rata yang mereka capai adalah 19,60, yang jatuh pada batas atas untuk kategori cukup (17-20). Mahasiswa mengalami kesulitan dalam menguasai kalimat tak langsung terutama pada saat mereka diminta untuk mengubah kalimat langsung menjadi kalimat tak langsung tanpa ada jawaban pilihan (pada bagian B dalam tes-Mengisi Titik-Titik). Pada bagian pertama dalam tes (bagian A-Pilihan Ganda), mahasiswa bisa mencapai 76,92% jawaban benar. Akan tetapi, mereka hanya mencapai 42,12% jawaban benar pada bagian kedua dalam tes (bagian B-Mengisi Titik-Titik). Pencapaian tersebut sangat jauh dibawah standar minimum kelulusan (penguasaan).
Jawaban untuk masalah yang kedua yaitu bahwa mahasiswa membuat banyak kesalahan dalam kalimat tak langsung. Berdasarkan klasifikasi surface strategy, mahasiswa membuat kesalahan sebanyak 51 yang dibagi menjadi 10 kesalahan pada omission of major content (19,61%), 4 kesalahan pada omission of grammatical morpheme (7,84%), 2 kesalahan pada double marking (3,92%), 17 kesalahan pada simple addition (33,33%), 5 kesalahan pada alternating form (9,80%), dan 13 kesalahan pada misordering (25,49%). Mahasiswa membuat kesalahan terbanyak dalam perubahan gramatikal dalam kalimat tak langsung yaitu 354 kesalahan. Jumlah kesalahan tersebut meliputi 97 kesalahan pada tense (27,40%), 29 kesalahan pada kata ganti (8,19%), 154 kesalahan pada keterangan waktu (43,50%), 19 kesalahan pada keterangan tempat (5,37%), 10 kesalahan pada this dan these (2,82%), 1 kesalahan pada kata kerja modal (0,28%), 14 kesalahan pada susunan kata (3,95%), 2 kesalahan pada to-infinitive (0,56%), dan 28 kesalahan pada that-clause (7,91%).
Mahasiswa juga membuat 33 kesalahan pada tipe-tipe kalimat tak langsung. Mereka membuat 11 kesalahan pada kalimat tanya tak langsung (33,33%), 17 kesalahan pada kalimat perintah tak langsung (51,51%), dan 5 kesalahan pada kalimat seru tak langsung (15,15%).
Jawaban untuk masalah yang ketiga yaitu bahwa kesalahan-kesalahan yang dibuat mahasiswa disebabkan oleh pengaruh Bahasa Indonesia, kalimat tak langsung itu sendiri, dan faktor eksternal yaitu dosen dantext bookyang digunakan.
Berkaitan dengan hasil penelitian, studi ini menyumbangkan beberapa saran. Pertama, para dosen Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris disarankan untuk menyediakan waktu khusus untuk mengajarkan kalimat tak langsung secara bertahap dan berkesinambungan mengingat kerumitan yang ada dalam kalimat tak langsung. Kedua, para mahasiswa disarankan untuk lebih kreatif dan aktif dalam mempelajari kalimat tak langsung supaya kesalahan-kesalahan mereka bisa diminimalisasi dan mereka bisa meningkatkan penguasaan pada kalimat tak langsung. Ketiga, peneliti-peneliti berikutnya disarankan untuk mengembangkan studi ini dengan menggunakan partisipan yang berbeda dan dengan menggunakan tes, observasi, dan wawancara sebagai instrumennya.
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses six sub-chapters dealing with a study on the mastery and the errors of reported speech of the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. Those six major topics are background of the study, problem limitation, problem formulation, objectives, benefits, and definition of terms.
A. Background of the Study
When an English speaker wants to report someone else’s words, thoughts, or beliefs, the speaker may use either direct speech or reported speech (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 1983). For instance, Aldo wants to report what Aldy has said to him using direct speech:
Aldy said, ‘I will finish my writing tonight.’ or using indirect speech (reported speech):
Aldy said that he would finish his writing that night.
From the example above, there are many obvious differences, which can be seen from the speaker’s report between direct speech and reported speech. When the second speaker reports what the first speaker has said to him using direct speech, he does not need to make any changes from the first speaker’s words. He just repeats the first speaker’s original exact words directly. On the contrary, when the second speaker reports the first speaker’s words using reported speech, he has to make many changes such as in the verb tense, in pronoun, and in adverbial time. He also needs to add the conjunctionthatin his report.
Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1983) said that due to those differences, ESL/EFL students often find indirect speech or reported speech to be a problematic area of English grammar. It is because many non European languages have less formal distinction between direct speech and reported speech than that of English. For example, Tina, an Indonesian speaker, wants to report what Sari, another Indonesian speaker, has said to her using Indonesian direct speech (it refers to kalimat langsung):
Sari berkata, ‘Aku sudah makan pagi.’ (Sari said, ‘I have had my breakfast.’)
or using Indonesian reported speech (it refers tokalimat tak langsung): Sari berkata bahwa dia sudah makan pagi.
(Sari said that she had had her breakfast.)
From the example above, it is true that Indonesian language makes less formal distinction between direct speech and reported speech than that of English. There are only two changes when the speaker converts Indonesian direct speech (kalimat langsung) into Indonesian reported speech (kalimat tak langsung). They are the presence of conjunction bahwa (that) and the change of pronoun aku (I) into dia (she). Whereas the speaker has to make four changes when she converts English direct speech into English reported speech. Those four changes are 1) the presence of conjunction that; 2) the change of subject pronounI into she; 3) the change of verb tensehave hadintohad had; and 4) the change of possessive pronounmyintoher.
researcher from her own experience when she learnt reported speech in semester IV. She observed that mostly students were confused when they had to convert direct speech into reported speech. Even though they had learnt reported speech in semester II, they still found reported speech difficult to master and made many errors in reported speech tests. They were often confused to change the verb tense, the pronoun, the demonstrative, and the adverbial time and place when they converted direct speech into reported speech. One more thing that made students found difficult in reported speech was the word order of reported speech was different from that of direct speech, for example:
direct speech :‘How old are you?’ Mr. John says. reported speech :Mr. John asks me how old I am.
Word order difference between direct and indirect speech is another area that is often affected when students attempt to convert direct speech into indirect speech (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 1983).
The problems the students faced became the intended case for this study to find out how far the students had mastered reported speech and further to analyse the students’ errors in reported speech. Beside the interference from the native language, Indonesian, which make students find reported speech difficult to master as it was stated by Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman above, this study also attempted to analyse the other possible causes of students’ errors in reported speech.
Blair, & Collins, 2000). Besides, as students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University who belong to Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, they are prepared and expected to be teachers. They have to have good knowledge of English grammar so that they are able to give correct explanation to their students later on.
B. Problem Limitation
This study focuses on the mastery and the errors of reported speech of the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. The fourth semester students were chosen as the respondents in this study since they had just learnt reported speech in Structure IV. Even though they had learnt reported speech in the second semester, they still found reported speech difficult to master and still made many errors in their tests. Therefore, this research was conducted to find out how far the students had mastered reported speech, what types of errors the students made in reported speech, and what possible causes of students’ errors were. The limitation of this study was on the written form of reported speech as this study analysed the students’ mastery, the students’ errors, and the possible causes of students’ errors from the reported speech test given.
C. Problem Formulation
There are three questions formulated in this study:
1. How far have the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University mastered reported speech?
D. Objectives
The objectives of this study are stated as follows:
1. This study would like to find out how far the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University had mastered reported speech.
2. This study would like to find out what types of errors that students made in reported speech.
3. This study would like to figure out the possible causes of students’ errors in reported speech.
E. Benefits
This study is expected to give benefits for: 1. The students
Hopefully, this study will help the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University, the students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University in general, and the other students majoring in English Education to enrich their knowledge of reported speech since this study provides enough space for the discussion on reported speech. Students can pay more attention to the difficult parts of reported speech they have and learn more those difficult parts so that they will improve their mastery of reported speech.
2. The lecturers
understand what difficulties the students have in mastering reported speech. The lecturers will give more attention in finding out the best way to explain reported speech to help students master it easily.
3. The readers
By reading this paper, hopefully the readers will have deeper understanding of reported speech and of errors which may occur in reported speech. Besides, this study gives additional information to the readers why reported speech is crucial to be researched.
F. Definition of Terms
In this thesis, some terms are clarified to avoid misunderstandings that might occur due to different definition of terms used in this paper.
1. Reported Speech
Reported speech refers to using a noun clause to report what someone has said (Azar, 1989). In reported speech, the exact meaning of speech is given without necessarily using the speaker’s exact words (Thomson & Martinet, 1980). Reported speech chosen as the topic in this study is one of the materials of Structure IV, which students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University have to take in semester IV.
Thomson and Martinet (1980) and Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1983) say that indirect speech also refers to reported speech. In addition to support their idea, Swan (1995) gives his argument as follows:
There is no problem whether to use the term ‘indirect speech’ or ‘reported speech’ since they are the same. This study, however, uses the term ‘reported speech’ instead of indirect speech to make it constant.
2. Direct Speech
It is necessary to clarify direct speech in this part as reported speech and direct speech are tied together. Direct speech refers to using the original speaker’s exact words (more or less) to report what he or she has said or to report what he or she thought (Swan, 1995). In direct speech, there are no changes of the first speaker’s original sentence.
3. Mastery
Fries (1945) states that a person has learned a foreign language when he or she has thus, first, within a limited vocabulary mastered the sound system (that is, when he or she can understand the stream of speech and achieve an understandable production of it) and has, second, made the structural devices (that is, the basic arrangements of utterances) matters of automatic habit. This study pays more attention to the mastery of structural devices. Since reported speech is part of structural devices in which it has its own form, rule and meaning, therefore, one is considered to have mastered reported speech if he or she 1) understands the forms and the rules of reported speech, 2) understands how to convert direct speech into reported speech correctly and appropriately, 3) understands the meaning of reported speech, and 4) understands how to use reported speech correctly.
4. Errors
refer to flawed side of learner’s speech or writing. They are parts of conversation or composition that deviate from some selected norm of mature language performance (Dulay, Burt, & Krashen, 1982). To refer to the reported speech errors, this study used students’ incorrect answers in their reported speech test.
5. Interlingual Transfer
When a student is in the process of learning English, he or she might make errors due to the interference from his or her native language. This is called interlingual transfer. It is because the beginning stage of learning a second language is characterised by a good deal of interlingual transfer from the native language or interference (Brown, 1987).
6. Intralingual Transfer
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter presents two main sub-chapters of discussion. The first is the discussion on the theories related to this study, which is presented in theoretical description. The second concerns with theoretical framework of the students’ mastery and the errors of reported speech.
A. Theoretical Description
This section starts with the discussion of direct speech, speech which reported speech is converted from. Then this section proceeds to discuss reported speech including its definition, its punctuation, its types, and its grammatical changes. Finally, this section discusses errors not only the theories but also the types and the sources.
1. Direct Speech
As reported speech and direct speech are tied together, it is essential to clarify direct speech first in this section.
a. Definition
When, for example, speaker A reports what speaker B has said or speaker B thought using speaker B’s original exact words, speaker A’s report is called direct speech (Swan, 1995). There is repetition of the original speaker’s exact words in direct speech (Thomson & Martinet, 1980).
In direct speech, there are two parts namely reporting clause and reported clause. Reported clause begins with the capital letter after reporting clause. It is put between the quotation marks after coma, for example: John said, ‘The library closes at 8 tonight.’From this example, the reporting clause isJohn saidand the reported clause is The library closes at 8 tonight. Reporting clause can be placed before reported clause or after reported clause, for example:
before reported clause:John said, ‘The library closes at 8 tonight.’
after reported clause:‘The library closes at 8 tonight,’John said.
b. Punctuation
There are three punctuations of direct speech explained in the following part. 1). Colon
Direct speech uses a colon when there is a name of the speaker in it. It is like in a form of dialogue, for example:
Peter:‘When do we have a holiday, Dad?’ Mr. Knight:‘Next week.’
Swan (1995) also says that a colon is used when direct speech is introduced by a name or short phrase (as in the text of play or when famous sayings are quoted), for example:
POLONIUS:‘What do you need my lord?’ HAMLET:‘Words, words, words.’
2). Comma
clause, comma is put exactly after reported clause, for example: ‘The library closes at 8 tonight,’ John said. Swan (1995) supports this idea by stating that a comma is generally used between a reporting expression and a piece of direct speech, for example:‘I don’t like this one bit,’ said Julia.
3). Quotation Marks
Typical characteristic of direct speech is the quotation marks. There are two types of quotation marks i.e. single quotation marks (‘…’), which is British English, and double quotation marks (“…”), which is American English (Swan, 1995).
If there are quotation words inside quotations, double quotation marks are used inside single quotation marks or single inside double (Swan, 1995), for example:Ann said,‘Just I was leaving, a voice shouted,“Stop!”.’Double quotation marks are used inside single quotation marks or vice-versa when there is the title of e.g. a book or a film (Alexander, 1990), for example: ‘How long did it take you to read “War and Peace”?’I asked.
2. Reported Speech
The following discussion explains further about reported speech taken from some grammar books.
a. Definition
b. Types of Reported Speech
There are six types of reported speech discussed below. 1). Statement
Reported statement is used when someone is 1) reporting a conversation that is still going on, 2) reading a letter and reporting what it is said, 3) reading instructions and reporting them, and 4) reporting a statement that someone makes very often (Thomson & Martinet, 1980).
Example:Tom says that he will never get married. 2). Question
Reported question is used when someone is reporting someone else’s question. There are two types of reported speech questions, which are WH-question and Yes/No-question.
WH-Question
WH-question (of reported clause) of reported speech is expressed by WH + subject (S) + verb (V).
Example:
Direct question:She says to me, ‘What is your name?’ Reported question:She asks me what my name is.
WH S V
Yes/No-Question
Example:
Direct question:She says to me, ‘Are you a student?’ Reported question:She asks me if/whether I am a student.
C S V
3). Command or Imperative
Direct commands are usually expressed by the imperative (Thomson & Martinet, 1980). Thus, reported command also refers to reported imperative. To convert direct command into reported command, the form ofto-infinitive is used here.
There are two commands discussed in this part. They are positive command and negative command.
Positive Command
Positive command of reported speech is expressed by subject (S) + imperative verb + object (O) +to-infinitive.
Example:
Direct command:She says to me, ‘Come here!’
Reported command:She asked me to come there. S imperative verb O to-infinitive
Negative Command
Negative command of reported speech is expressed by subject (S) + imperative verb + object (O) +not to-infinitive.
Example:
Direct command: ‘Don’t wait!’ he said.
4). Request
When somebody wants to report someone else’s request, the reporting verb (a verb of request) should match the function of the request, for example:
Direct request:‘Would you like to come for a drive with me?’ said Andrew. Reported request:Andrewasked/invited me to come for a drive with him.
a verb of request O infinitive
Indirect request is usually expressed by a verb of request + object + infinitive (Thomson & Martinet, 1980).
5). Advice and Suggestion
Indirect advice or reported advice is expressed by a verb of advice + object + infinitive (Thomson & Martinet, 1980), for example:
Direct advice:‘Why don’t you take off your coat?’ he said. Reported advice:He advised me to take off my coat.
a verb of advice O infinitive
Different from reported advice, reported suggestion does not use infinitive structure after suggest (Swan, 1995). Reported suggestion can be expressed by, for example:
Direct suggestion: ‘We should meet at the theatre,’ Donn said. Reported suggestion:Donn suggested meeting at the theatre.
or
Donn suggested that we should meet at the theatre. 6). Exclamation
A direct exclamation must become a statement in reported speech (Thomson & Martinet, 1980). When someone reports the exclamation, he or she does not always apply the rule mechanically as he or she reports statement, question, command, request, advice, and suggestion.
Direct Speech Reported Speech He said, ‘Thank you!’ He thanked me.
He said, ‘Damn!’ He swore.
She said, ‘What a wonderful afternoon!’ She enjoyed the wonderful afternoon. c. Punctuation
Different from direct speech, in reported speech structures, there is no use of quotation marks (Azar, 1989) and there is no use of comma beforethat,what,where, etc. (Swan, 1995), for example: Everybody realised that I was a foreigner (NOT Everybody realised, that…). The exclamation mark is also not used when someone reports the exclamation, for example:
Direct exclamation:He said, ‘Thank you!’ Reported exclamation:He thanked me.
Since the interrogative form of the verb changes to the affirmative form, there is also no use of question mark (?) in reported question (Thomson & Martinet, 1980), for example:
Direct question:He said, ‘Where does she live?’ Reported question:He asked where she lived.
d. Conjunctionthat
When that is put between brackets in the written form of reported speech, it indicates that it can be omitted or dropped, for example:John said (that)the library closed at 8 that night. The conjunction that is often dropped, especially after common reporting verbs e.g.say, think(Swan, 1995).
e. Reporting Verbs (Say, Tell, Ask)
Reporting verbs discussed in this study are say, tell, ask, since they are the highest frequency used in both direct speech and reported speech.
1). Say
There are two ways of the use of reporting verbsayin reported speech.
Usingto+ personal indirect object
Example:Hesaid to me(that) he hadn’t got much time.
Omittingtoand personal indirect object Example:Hesaid(that) he hadn’t got much time.
2). Tell
Reporting verbtellused in reported speech is usually followed by object.
Example:Hetold me(that) he was tired. (NOT Hetold to methat he was tired)
3). Ask
In reported question,askcan be used with or without personal indirect object, for example:
Sheasked (me) if I was tired. optional
Beside those three reporting verbs, there are other reporting verbs discussed in this part since they were used in the test as the instrument of this research. They are remind, warn, advice, and invite. Those reporting verbs are followed by object and infinitive form, for example:
Direct speech:‘Don’t forget to order the wine,’ said Mrs. Pitt. Reported speech:Mrs. Pittreminded her husbandto order the wine.
Another reporting verb used in the test was suggest. Suggest is not followed by object and infinitive structure. It is followed bythat-clause, for example:
Direct speech:‘You should see the doctor,’ Ivan said.
Reported speech:Ivansuggested that I should see the doctor.
f. Grammatical Changes
This part discusses the grammatical changes in reported speech. 1). Tense
If someone converts direct speech into reported speech, one thing he or she must notice is the tense of reported clause may change or move. If the reporting clause of direct speech is present or future, the tense of reported clause of reported speech will not change. However, if the reporting clause of direct speech is past, the tense that follows it will change. The changes of tenses in reported speech follow these rules:
present becomes past
past becomes past perfect
Move Move
x---x---x Past Perfect Simple Past Simple Present
Past Perfect Continuous Past Continuous Present Continuous Past Perfect Present Perfect
Past Perfect Continuous Present Perfect Continuous
Move Move
x---x---x
Past Future Perfect Past Future Simple Future
Past Future Perfect Continuous Future Continuous Future Continuous Future Perfect Future Perfect
Future Perfect Continuous Future Perfect Continuous
Figure 2.1 The Tenses Movement in Reported Speech
From figure 2.1 above, there is one tense back movement of reported clause (Alexander, 1990). The change of tense in the reported speech clause is accomplished by a process called tense harmony. Tense harmony or “back shifting” is the pushing back in time of the tense of the reported speech to agree with the tense of the reporting verb (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 1983).
Examples:
Direct speech:He said, ‘I have lost my umbrella.’ Reported speech:He said that he had lost his umbrella.
Direct speech:She says, ‘I help my parents at home everyday.’
Reported speech:She says that she helps her parents at home everyday.
every pattern of tense so that they can convert direct speech into reported speech correctly.
2). Pronoun
Another change which someone makes when he or she converts direct speech into reported speech is pronoun. Pronoun changes when the second speaker reports the first speaker’s speech as in the following example:
Ann (first speaker):‘I don’t like party.’
Suzy (second speaker):Ann said thatshedidn’t like party.
Pronoun and possessive adjective normally change from first or second person to third person except when the speaker is reporting his own words (Thomson & Martinet, 1980).
Examples:
Direct speech:I said, ‘I like my new house.’
Reported speech: I said that I liked my new house. (Speaker is reporting his own words.)
Direct speech:He said, ‘I have lost my umbrella.’
Reported speech: He said that he had lost his umbrella. (Speaker is reporting someone else’s words.)
3). Adverb
There are two adverbs discussed below since they change to agree with the tense of the reporting verb.
Adverb of Time
Table 2.1 The Changes of Adverbial Time in Reported Speech
the next day/the following day in two days time
the following week/year etc. the previous week/year etc. Example:
Direct speech:He said to me, ‘I have lunch at the cafeteria yesterday.’
Reported speech:He said to me that he had lunch at the cafeteriathe day before.’
Adverb of Place
In reported speech, the adverb of place here usually becomes there but only when it is clear what place is meant (Thomson & Martinet, 1980).
Example:
Direct speech:He said, ‘I will be here again tomorrow.’
Reported speech:He said that he would bethereagain the next day. 4). ThisandThese
When converting direct speech into reported speech, the demonstrative this usually becomes that and the demonstrative these usually becomes those, for example:
Direct speech:He said, ‘She is coming this week.’
Reported speech:He said that she was comingthatweek. 5). Modal Verbs
Direct speech:He said, ‘It would be nice if I could see you again.’ Reported speech:He said that itwouldbe nice if he could see me again. 6). Modal Auxiliary
Unlike modal verbs, modal auxiliary changes or shifts in reported speech clause because of the tense harmony (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 1983). Figure 2.3 shows the shifts of modal auxiliary in reported speech (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 1983).
may
can shall
will must
might (possibility) could (permission) could
would (future)
should (ask for advice) would
had to
Figure 2.2 The Shifts of Modal Auxiliary in Reported Speech
Example:
Direct speech:‘We must stay here,’ Paula said.
Reported speech:Paula said that wehad tostay there. 7). Word Order
When someone quotes or reports the first speaker’s question using reported speech, he or she should notice that the word order of the reported question is different from that of the original question.
Example:
Reported speech:She asks me what my name is.
(NOT She asks me what is my name.) 8). General Truth
For reporting general truth or something which is still true, there is no need to change the verb whatever the tense of reporting clause is (Murphy, 1985).
Examples:
Direct speech:Tom said, ‘New York is more lively than London.’ Reported speech:Tom said that New York is more lively than London.
(The situation has not change that New York is more lively than London.)
Direct speech:Mr. Tim said, ‘The sun rises in the East.’ Reported speech:Mr. Tim said that the sun rises in the East. 9). To-Infinitive andThat-Clause
To report direct command, request, and advice, the formto-infinitive is used after object as it was discussed in the previous parts of grammatical changes.
Example:
Direct command:‘Be quiet!’ Ann said.
Reported command:Ann asked meto be quiet.
Direct request:‘Will you be my girl?’ Ivan said. Reported request:Ivan asked meto be his girl.
Example:
Direct suggestion:‘You should go now,’ Jane said.
Reported suggestion:Jane suggestedthat I should go then.
3. Errors
Since this study also deals with the reported speech errors, it is essential to elaborate what errors are in this part. Not only errors but also mistakes are discussed here.
a. Definition
There are many views from some linguists telling about the definitions of errors. Brown (1987) says that an error is noticeable deviation from the adult grammar of a native speaker, reflecting the interlanguage competence of the learner. According to Dulay, Burt, & Krashen (1982), errors are flawed side of learner’s speech or writing. They are part of conversation or composition that deviates from some selected norm of mature language performance. Another definition is stated by Corder that error is the systematic deviation because the learner is still developing knowledge of the second language rule system (cited in Dulay et al., 1982).
Reflecting the linguists’ notions of errors above, this study defines errors as the noticeable deviation of the target language occurring in English reported speech. Specifically, errors studied in this research were the incorrect answers made by students in their reported speech test.
b. The Purpose of the Study of Errors
difficult parts the students face so that they can improve their teaching ability. Studying learners’ errors indicates to teachers and curriculum developers which part of the target language students have most difficulty producing correctly and which error types detract most from a learners’ ability to communicate effectively (Dulay et al., 1982).
c. Errors versus Mistakes
It is usually difficult to differentiate errors from mistakes since both of them relates to the incorrectness. Thus, it is essential to clarify their differences in this paper.
Errors occur when someone makes incorrectness of the foreign language grammar he or she learns but he or she does not know the correct pattern of it. As it is explained by Brown (1987) that, for example in many occasions, a student who learns English says ‘John wills go,’ ‘John mays come,’ ‘John cans sing,’ and so forth, this phenomenon is called error. It is because the student is not able to distinguish modals from other verbs. An error also occurs when someone communicates in more complicated language than he or she has so far learned (Lewis, 2002).
d. Classifications of Errors
This study discusses error classifications proposed by Dulay et al. (1982). He classifies errors into four descriptive classifications. They are 1) linguistic category, 2) surface strategy, 3) comparative analysis, and 4) communicative effect (Dulay et al., 1982). Those four classifications are discussed further below.
1). Linguistic Category
Linguistic category classifies errors according to either or both the language components or the particular linguistic constituents that influences errors (Dulay et al., 1982). Language components include phonology (pronunciation), syntax and morphology (grammar), semantics and lexicon (meaning and vocabulary), and discourse (style). Constituents include the elements that comprise each language component. The examples of error types based on linguistic category classification are presented in the table of error types based on linguistic category classification (see appendix 3).
2). Surface Strategy
Surface strategy classification deals with the ways the surface structures of the sentences are altered (Dulay et al., 1982). This classification has four error types whose each type is explained further below.
Omission
The second is omission of grammatical morpheme. This type is characterised by the absence of an item that does not contribute much to the meaning of the sentence.
Addition
Addition is characterised by the presence of an item which must not appear in a well-formed utterance. There are three types of addition. The first is double marking. This type is characterised by the presence of two items or more rather than one in a sentence when only one marker is required. The second is regularization. It is a presence of a marker that should not be added to exceptional items. The third is simple addition error. It is an addition error which is not a double marking nor a regularization.
Misformation
Misformation errors are characterised by the use of the wrong form of the morpheme or structure (Dulay et al., 1982). There are three types of misformation errors. First is regularization. It is a regular marker which is used in place of an irregular one, as inrunned forranor goosesfor geese(Dulay et al., 1982). Dulay et al. also call regularization error that falls under the misformation category as overregularization. Second is archi form. It is the use of one form for the several required. Third is alternating form. This error is characterised by the use of two or more forms in random alternation even though the language requires the use of each only under certain conditions.
Misordering
The examples of error types based on the surface strategy classification are presented in the table of error types based on surface strategy classification (see appendix 4).
3). Comparative Taxonomy
Comparative taxonomy classifies errors based on comparisons between the structure of L2 errors and certain other types of constructions (Dulay et al., 1982). This taxonomy has four error categories.
Developmental Errors
These are errors similar to those made by children learning the target language as their first language.
Example: Dog eat it.
(It is made by a Spanish child learning English in which he or she makes the omission of the article and the past tense marker.)
Interlingual Errors
This category concerns with L2 errors that reflect native language structures, regardless of the internal processes or external conditions that influence the errors. Example:
the man skinny
Ambiguous Errors
Ambiguous errors are defined as errors that reflect the learner’s native language structure, and at the same time, they are of the type found in the speech of children acquiring a first language.
Example: I no have a car.
(The negative form reflects the learner’s native Spanish and is also characteristic of the speech of children learning English as their first language.)
Other Errors
Dulay et al., (1982) call these errors unique since they are unique to L2 learners. Example:
She do hungry
4). Communicative Effect
Communicative effect taxonomy is the last classification of errors proposed by Dulay et al. (1982). This classification deals with errors from the perspective of their effect on the listener or the reader (Dulay et al., 1982).
e. Sources of Errors
This part discusses the sources of errors proposed by Brown (1987). Later, this discussion is used to answer the problem formulation number three in Chapter IV.
According to Brown (1987), there are three sources of errors, which are discussed below.
1). Interlingual Transfer
language is not yet familiar for the students. The native language is the only linguistic system for them. Example: Students who learn English often say the book of Jackinstead ofJack’s book.
2). Intralingual Transfer
A major factor in second language learning is intralingual transfer (the target language itself). The errors occur because the students have begun to acquire some parts of the new system. In progression of the second language learning, students begin to include structures within the target language itself, for example:Does John can sing?(It should beCan John sing?)
3). Context of Learning
It is stated by Brown (1987) that this source of errors deals with the classroom with the teacher and the material in the case of school learning, or the social situation in the case of untutored second language learning.
Richard (1971) as cited in Brown (1987) also says that in a classroom context, the teacher or the text book can lead the students to make faulty hypothesis about the language which is called “false concepts.” The teacher with his/her misleading explanation can cause students in making errors.
B. Theoretical Framework
Study Program of Sanata Dharma University in Structure IV. Structure IV here is one of the compulsory subjects that must be taken by the fourth semester students. Reported speech studied in this paper was limited in the written form which the students converted it from direct speech.
In this study, there are three problems regarding the fourth semester students’ mastery and errors of reported speech. This study used a test to collect the information and also to answer those three problems. To answer the first problem, which was to figure out how far the fourth semester students have mastered reported speech, this study performed necessary statistical computation. Later, the result of the computation was compared to the standard of mastery stated in the academic regulation of Sanata Dharma University. The students’ mastery on reported speech was found out from their scores in the test. These scores were then compared to the minimum standard of mastery stated in the academic regulation of Sanata Dharma University. If their achievement in reported speech is low according to that academic regulation, it means that they still have difficulties in mastering reported speech. If their achievement is high, then it can be said that they have mastered reported speech.
Concerning the second problem, which was to figure out the types of errors that students made in reported speech, this study used the students’ answers to analyse what types of errors they made. The analysis of students’ errors was based on 1) the types of errors proposed by Dulay et al., 2) the grammatical changes of reported speech, and 3) the types of reported speech.
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents some parts dealing with the procedure of this study. They are research method, research participants, research setting, research instrument, data gathering technique, data analysis, and research procedure.
A. Research Method
The method used in this research was a survey. A survey is a research method, which is conducted to collect information about characteristics of a population (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1993). This research collected information from a sample rather than from every member of population. The purpose of survey conducted in this research was to figure out how far the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University had mastered reported speech, what types of errors that students made in reported speech, and what possible causes of students’ errors in reported speech were.
B. Research Participants
The participants of this study were the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University in the academic year of 2006/2007. They were chosen since they had learnt reported speech in Structure IV. They had also learnt reported speech when they were in the second semester (in Structure II). Since they had learnt reported speech twice, it was assumed that they would make fewer errors in their reported speech test.
As the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University were in a great number, a sample was selected to represent the population as a whole. Then the result of the data analysis of sample would be generalised to the population.
A representative sample applied in this research was cluster sampling in which groups, not individuals, were randomly selected (Gay, 1992). There were two classes chosen as the clusters of this research. All the students in each of the two classes were included as the sample.
C. Research Setting
This research took place in the English Language Education Study Program of Teachers Training and Education Faculty of Sanata Dharma University. This research was conducted during the period of the even semester in 2007. This research was conducted in Structure IV class. There were two classes of Structure IV chosen in this research.
D. Research Instrument
The instrument used to gather the data in this study was a test. A test was a method of measuring student’s ability or knowledge in reported speech (Hughes, 1989).
this part, the students were also required to understand the meaning of direct speech otherwise they would not be able to convert it into reported speech correctly and appropriately. The second part was ten items of filling in the blanks. In this part, the students were asked to fill in the blanks with the correct reported speech. The objective of this part was that the students were able to demonstrate their ability to convert direct speech into reported speech correctly. Those parts of test, multiple-choice and filling in the blanks, were constructed to get a good language test (Heaton, 1975).
A test used as the instrument of this research should possess two important characteristics namely validity and reliability (Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh, 1990). Those two characteristics are discussed further below.
1. Validity
One criterion to be a good test is that it should have test validity in which a test measures what it is intended to measure (Hughes, 1989). There were four categories of validity used in this study. They were content validity, criterion-related evidence of validity, construct validity, and face validity. The following are the further discussion on those categories of validity followed by the evidences found in the test. a). Content Validity
A test is said to have content validity if it covers the elements of the language intended to be tested (Hughes, 1989). This validity also refers to the relevancy of the content of the test to the purpose of the test (Brown, 1987).
speech, find out the students’ errors in reported speech, and figure out the possible causes of students’ errors. The test also had content validity as it covered all samples of reported speech. Table 3.1 shows the blue print of the reported speech types in the test.
Table 3.1 The Blue Print of the Reported Speech Types in the Test
No Types Item Numbers Total
1 Statement 1A, 2A, 3A,
21B, 22B 5
2 Question 4A, 5A, 6A, 7A
23B, 24B 6
3 Command 8A, 9A, 10A
25B, 26B, 27B 6
4 Request 11A, 12A, 13A
28B 4
5 Suggestion and Advice 14A, 15A, 16A
29B 4
6 Exclamation 17A, 18A, 19A, 20A
30B 5
30
The test used in this research contained all samples of the grammatical changes of reported speech. A table of the grammatical changes of reported speech in the test is presented in the appendix as the evidence (see appendix 5).
b). Criterion-Related Evidence of Validity
c). Construct Validity
The third category which a test must have is construct validity. A test has construct validity if it can be demonstrated that it measures the ability which is supposed to measure (Brown, 1987). The test constructed in this research was a kind of grammar test. This test had construct validity since it was able to measure the fourth semester students’ ability in converting direct speech into reported speech. d). Face Validity
According to Hughes (1989), a test fulfills face validity category if it looks as if it measures what it is supposed to measure. To make the test has face validity, Heaton (1979) states that the test items look right to the other testers, teachers, lecturers, or other persons who know enough about the subject. Based on Heaton’s explanation, the test constructed in this research had been consulted to a lecturer of Structure IV and two English instructors. They said that from its face, the test really measured what it was intended to measure.
2. Reliability
Reliability deals with the consistency of the scores in measuring whatever it is intended to measure (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1993). The test is reliable if the same test is given to the same subjects or matched subjects on two different occasions, the test itself should yield similar results (Brown, 1987).
According to Fraenkel and Wallen (1993) there are three methods to measure the reliability of the test. They are test-retest method, equivalent-forms method, and internal consistency method.
only a single administration of the test. The procedure of this method is that the items are divided into two halves, odd-numbered items and even-numbered items. The odd-numbered items were labeled X and the even-numbered items were labeled Y. Then, the scores of each half were counted.
To calculate the reliability of the half test, this study used the Pearson Product Moment formula presented in the figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1 The Pearson Product Moment Formula
2 / 1
r = the reliability of the half test N = the number of participants
X = the number of correct answers from the odd-numbered items Y = the number of correct answers from the even-numbered items
The reliability of the full test was then calculated using Spearman-Brown Prophecy formula (Hughes, 1989) presented in the figure 3.2.
2
Figure 3.2 The Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula
1
r = the reliability of the full test
2 / 1
r = the reliability of the half test
Table 3.2 The Reliability of the Test
COEFFICIENT RELATIONSHIP
0.00 – 0.20 negligible
0.20 – 0.40 low
0.40 – 0.60 moderate
0.60 – 0.80 substantial
0.80 – 1.00 high to very high
E. Data Gathering Technique
The data was collected from the participants’ work through the test of reported speech. The test was given in different time and place to the students of the two classes chosen. The test was conducted in the class during Structure IV lesson.
F. Data Analysis
There were two steps used to analyse the data from the test as the instrument of this research. Those steps are explained as follows:
1. Checking and Scoring
This step was started by collecting the student’s answers. Then the students’ answers were checked to show the correct and the incorrect answers. Both the correct and the incorrect answers were given different check marks, circle (O) for the correct answers and cross (X) for the incorrect answers. It was intended to make easier to classify the answers.
After checking, each item of the test was scored. For all items in part A and part B, the scoring used a scale 1-0, one (1) was for the correct answer and zero (0) was for the incorrect answer. Each correct item then was counted to show the students’ scores. The result of scoring system both of each item and of the total score (the sum) were presented in the table. Then, the students’ scores were counted and presented in the table of the students’ achievement in the test. The presentation of the students’ achievement in the test would answer problem formulation number one.
2. Classifying
G. Research Procedure
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the research findings and discussion. The first section of this chapter concerns with the presentation of the students’ achievement in the test. The second section of this chapter presents the data analysis of the research. It includes the reliability of the test and the descriptive statistics of the research. The last section is the discussion which deals with answering the three problems of this research. Those three problems are 1) ‘How far have the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University mastered reported speech?’ 2) ‘What types of errors do the students make in reported speech?’ and 3) ‘What are the possible causes of students’ errors in reported speech?’
A. Data Presentation
The data of this study were collected from the test which was administered to the fourth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. The test, as it was explained in Chapter III, consisted of two parts, multiple-choice (part A) and filling in the blanks (part B). The objective of the first part of the test was that the students were able to recognize the forms of reported speech which were converted from direct speech. The students were also required to understand the meaning of direct speech otherwise they would not be able to convert it into reported speech correctly. The objective of the second part of the test was that the students were able to demonstrate their ability to convert direct speech into reported speech correctly.
The data of the students’ achievement in reported speech both in the whole part of the test and in each part of the test are presented in the tables.
Table 4.1 The Students’ Achievement in the Whole Part of the Test Percentage of Correct Answers Number of Students Achieving
Percentage of Correct Answers
It can be seen from table 4.1 that most of the students (20 students) achieved 60-69% of correct answers. There was only one student who achieved the highest percentage (90-100). The students’ lowest achievement fell in the range 40-49. There were two students who achieved it.
Table 4.2 The Students’ Achievement in the First Part of the Test Percentage of Correct Answers Number of Students Achieving
Percentage of Correct Answers
(90-100). The students’ lowest achievement fell in the range 50-59, and there was one student who achieved it.
Table 4.3 The Students’ Achievement in the Second Part of the Test Percentage of Correct Answers Number of Students Achieving
Percentage of Correct Answers
Table 4.3 shows that most of the students (14 students) achieved 40-49% of correct answers in the second part of the test which consisted of 10 items of filling in the blanks. The students’ achievement in the second part of the test was lower than that of the first part of the test. It can be seen in table 4.3 above that there was no student who achieved the highest percentage (90-100). The students’ lowest achievement fell in the range 10-19, and there were six students achieving it.
B. Data Analysis
