iv
To Babe, Mom, Aak, Gunk, and Belok
“DREAM
BIG
!
v
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY
I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the references, as a scientific paper should.
Yogyakarta, March 10, 2011 The Writer
vi ABSTRACT
Kusumawardani, Arum. (2011). Students’ Mastery in Translating Relative Clauses from Indonesian into English. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.
As teacher candidates, the students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University are required to master the four competences in Communicative Competence, including Grammar Competence. Competence in English Grammar consists of the mastery of many grammar topics, including relative clauses. Moreover, it is found in the syllabus of the fifth semester that students should be able to translate complex sentences both from English into Indonesian and Indonesian into English, including Relative Clauses construction.
This study is aimed at answering two research questions namely: (1) How is mastery of the fifth semester students of the English Language Study Program in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English? (2) What types of errors are found in the students’ translation result of relative clauses from Indonesian into English? In doing the research, the researcher used a descriptive qualitative method using a test as the instrument. The participants of the study were the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. The result of the test done by the fifth semester students were used to answer the two research questions.
The first research question was answered based on the result of the test. The result of the test shows that the fifth semester students have insufficient mastery in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. They were included in Category E of Mastery (poor). The second research question was answered based on the students’ translation result on the test. The test result shows that there are some common errors that the students encountered. The errors were categorized into Error in Relative Clauses Construction and Error in Translation. Error in Relative Clauses Construction is divided into Error in Relative Pronoun Use and Error in Comma Use. Error in Translation is divided into Grammatical Error (Omission and Punctuation) and Error in Meaning (Diction and Spelling).
Based on the result of the test, in can be concluded that the fifth semester students have not mastered the ability of translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. The writer adds that to gain an idiomatic translation one cannot solely depends on grammatical knowledge but also on others, like knowledge on vocabulary and context. As suggestion for future studies, future researcher may study the translation of relative clauses in form of passage.
vii ABSTRAK
Kusumawardani, Arum. (2011). Students’ Mastery in Translating Relative Clauses from Indonesian into English. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Sebagai calon guru, mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris di Universitas Sanata Dharma diharapkan mengusai empat kompetensi yang terkandung dalam Communicative Competence, salah satunya adalah kompetensi tata bahasa (Grammar Competence). Kompetensi dalam tata bahasa Bahasa Inggris meliputi penguasaan materi berbagai bahasan termasuk penguasaan Relative Clauses (Klausa Sematan). Lebih lanjut, disebutkan dalam silabus semester lima bahwa mahasiswa harus dapat menerjemahkan kalimat majemuk baik dari Bahasa Inggris ke Bahasa Indonesia maupun dari Bahasa Indonesia ke Bahasa Inggris, termasuk kalimat majemuk yang mengandung relative clauses.
Studi ini bertujuan untuk menjawab dua pertanyaan, yaitu: (1) Bagaimana penguasaan mahasiswa Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris di Universitas Sanata Dharma terhadap kegiatan menerjemahkan relative clauses dari Bahasa Indonesia ke Bahasa Inggris? (2) Jenis error apa sajakah yang dapat ditemukan pada hasil terjemahan relative clauses mereka dari Bahasa Indonesia ke Bahasa Inggris? Dalam penelitian ini, penulis menggunakan metode descriptive qualitative dengan menggunakan tes sebagai instrumen penelitian. Partisipan dalam studi ini adalah mahasiswa semester lima program studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Hasil dari tes digunakan untuk menjawab kedua pertanyaan di atas.
Pertanyaan pertama dijawab menggunakan hasil dari tes. Hasil tes menunjukkan bahwa tingkat penguasaan mahasiswa semester lima dalam menerjemahkan relative clauses dari Bahasa Indonesia ke Bahasa Inggris cukup rendah (Kategori E). Pertanyaan kedua dijawab menggunakan data hasil terjemahan dari tes. Dari hasil tes diketahui beberapa error yang kerap muncul. Error tersebut dikategorisasikan ke dalam Error in Relative Clauses Construction dan Error in Translation. Error in Relative Clauses Construction dibagi menjadi Error in Relative Pronoun Use dan Error in Comma Use. Error in Translation terbagi atas Grammatical Error (Omission dan Punctuation) dan Error in Meaning (Diction dan Spelling).
Berdasarkan data dari tes, dapat disimpulkan bahwa mahasiswa semester lima masih belum menguasai kemampuan menerjemahkan relative clauses dari Bahasa Indonesia ke Bahasa Inggris. Penulis menambahkan, untuk memperoleh idiomatic translation mahasiswa tidak bisa hanya mengandalkan kemampuan tata bahasa tapi juga kemampuan lain seperti kemampuan dalam kosakata dan konteks. Sebagai saran untuk penelitian lebih lanjut, peneliti di masa datang diharapkan meneliti hasil terjemahan relative clauses dalam bentuk bacaan.
viii
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama : Arum Kusumawardani
Nomor Mahasiswa : 051214096
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
STUDENTS’ MASTERY IN TRANSLATING RELATIVE CLAUSES FROM INDONESIAN INTO ENGLISH
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta Pada tanggal: 10 Maret 2011 Yang menyatakan
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, my deepest gratitude goes to my Creator, who has given me life full of rocks and valleys and gifted me an extraordinary family. My endless learning in this life is much a blessing to me, including completing this thesis. My greatest gratitude goes to my family, Babe, Mom, Aak, and Agung for their enduring love and sacrifice, especially for my study. I could never thank them enough.
My appreciation also goes to my thesis sponsor Carla Sih Prabandari, S.Pd., M.Hum. for her assistance during the writing of this thesis. I owe a great deal of thanks to Laurentia Sumarni, S.Pd., Fidelis Chosa Kastuhandani, S.Pd., and Nugraha Krisdiyanta, S.Pd., M.Hum. who have permitted me to conduct research in their classes, and to the fifth semester students, especially those in Structure V (D), Translation I (A), and Morpho-syntax (B) classes for being the participants of this study. I wish to thank Maria Martarina Pramudani and Chatarina Artilantari for helping me with the permission letters and other formal documents.
x
I am grateful to have friends in Pringgading 9 (P9), especially Chris, Risang, Jody – Stella, Koko – hamsters, and Bocong – Kanya for the witty talks, discussions, jokes, scrabbles, and sharings which enrich me, personally. I would also like to thank Nancy Paula Herin for her assistance and companions during the toughest time in my struggling for this thesis. I would like to extend my thanks to my thesis-mates, Triast and Wiwin, for the sharings. My deepest appreciation to my boardinghouse mates (Reta, Redy, Nenen, Ndong, Tante, Windru, Tri, Ike, Mbak Lida, Nana, Jeng Ebie, Anas, Juju, and Mbak Bek) for the sharing of movies, games, jokes, gossips, nail-polishing-times and laughter. Those moments really helped me passed the hard times I experienced during this thesis completion.
My gratitude also goes to my CEC friends especially Ms Retno (Kakak), Ms Widdy, Ms Susan and Ms Neesa for the support and learning experiences. I would also extend my deepest appreciation to Dra. Lanny Anggawati, Dra. Wena Cintiawati, and Endang Widyawati, S.Pd for giving me the opportunity, encouragement and suggestion I could never get from others.
I must acknowledge a personal debt to Stefanus Angga ‘Belok’ Badara Prima for his massive help, companion, strength, encouragement and warm love. Without him, I doubt myself to finish this stage by now. My appreciation also goes to all other living angels and invisible hands that help me through times in completing this thesis, my thanks go beyond words. May God grant His blessing to us all.
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE ... i
APPROVAL PAGES ... ii
PAGE OF DEDICATION ... iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... v
ABSTRACT ... vi
ABSTRAK ... vii
LEMBAR PERNYATAANPERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS ... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... xi
LIST OF TABLES ... xv
LIST OF FIGURES ... xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xvii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A.Research Background ... 1
B.Problem Formulation ... 4
C.Problem Limitation ... 4
D.Research Objective ... 5
E.Research Benefits ... 6
F. Definition of Terms ... 7
1. Mastery ... 7
2. Relative Clauses ... 8
xii
4. The Fifth Semester Students ... 9
5. Indonesian ... 9
6. English ... 10
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A.Theoretical Backgrounds ... 10
1. Grammar Mastery ... 11
2. Translation Theory ... 13
a. Definition of Translation ... 13
b. Kinds of Translation ... 14
c. Criteria of a Good Translation ... 16
3. Relative Clauses ... 16
a. Relative Clause in English ... 16
1) Defining Relative Clause ... 16
2) Non-defining Relative Clause ... 17
3) Other Types of Relative Pronouns ... 18
4) Zero Relative Clause ... 19
b. Relative Clause in Indonesia ... 20
4. Error Analysis ... 22
a. Description of Error ... 22
b. Errors Categorization ... 23
B.Theoretical Framework ... 25
xiii
B.Research Participants ... 28
C.Research Instruments ... 29
1. Validity of the Test ... 30
a) Content Validity ... 30
b) Construct Validity ... 31
c) Face Validity ... 32
2. Reliability of the Test ... 32
3. The Scoring Procedure for the Test ... 35
D.Data Gathering Technique ... 35
E.Data Analysis Technique ... 36
F. Research Procedure ... 36
CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A.Students’ Mastery on the Translation of Relative Clauses from Indonesian into English ... 39
B.Types of Errors Found in the Students’ Translation Result of Relative Clauses from Indonesian into English ... 43
1. Students’ Errors in Relative Clauses Construction ... 43
a. Errors in Relative Pronouns ... 43
1) Errors in Subject Relative Pronouns ... 44
2) Errors in Object Relative Pronouns ... 66
b. Error in Comma Use ... 47
2. Students’ Errors in Translation ... 48
a. Grammatical Errors ... 48
xiv
2) Punctuation ... 50
b. Errors in Meaning ... 52
1) Diction ... 52
2) Spelling ... 54
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A.Conclusion ... 56
B. Suggestion ... 58
1. Suggestion for English Teachers and Instructors ... 58
2. Suggestion for Future Study ... 59
xv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 List of Score Category ... 13
Table 2.2 Uses of Relative Pronoun (Yule, 2004) ... 20
Table 2.3 The Categorization of Errors ... 24
Table 4.1 The Summary of the Students’ Achievement in the Test ... 40
Table 4.2 The Participants’ Score in Relation to the Category of Mastery ... 41
Table 4.3 Percentage of Errors in Relative Pronouns ... 44
xvi
LIST OF FIGURES
xvii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Permission Letter to Conduct Research (Surat Ijin Penelitian) ... 63
Appendix B Syllabus of Structure V ... 64
Appendix C Syllabus of Translation I ... 65
Appendix D Syllabus of Translation II ... 67
Appendix E The Test Blueprint ... 69
Appendix F Test Item ... 71
Appendix G Answers Key of the Test ... 73
Appendix H Participants’ Score in the Pilot Test ... 74
Appendix I Reliability Computation of the Pilot Test ... 75
Appendix J Participants’ Score of the Test ... 76
1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides background information and rationale for this study. It encompasses six sections. The six sections are background of the study, problem formulation, problem limitation, objectives of the study, benefits of the study, and definition of terms.
A. Research Background
English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University aims at educating future teachers. As teacher candidates, the students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University are required to master the four competences which are included in communicative competence. They are grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence, and strategic competence. As one of the four competences in communicative competence, grammatical competence should be mastered by the students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. Grammatical competence is “knowledge of the rules of the code, including vocabulary and word-formation, pronunciation/spelling and sentence structure i.e. the knowledge and skills required to understand and express the literal meaning of utterances” (Bell, 1991).
Grammar was used to mean the analysis of a language system, and the study of grammar was not just considered an essential feature of language learning, but was thought to be sufficient for learners to actually acquire another language.
It means mastering grammar is essential in language learning. There are so many topics to study in grammar. One of the topics is relative clauses. Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999) state “You’ll need to know a great deal about relative clauses as a teacher of ESL/EFL. This construction is – first and foremost – a type of complex postnominal adjectival modifier used in both written and spoken English.” This means that relative clauses are often used. Since the students of the English Language Education Study Program are teacher candidates for ESL/EFL learners, it is important for them to master relative clauses. By mastering relative clauses they will be able to explain it correctly and clearly to their students.
In the curriculum of the English Language Education Study Program, senior students are required to master all topics discussed in Structure Courses, including relative clauses. The students should be able to construct complex sentences using relative clauses, and thus should also be able to translate them from Indonesian into English. As teacher candidates whose native language is Indonesian, they need to master translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English to be able to explain it clearly and help Indonesian learners clearly understand the topic.
because it is complicated in terms of the relative pronouns used in the clauses and tense marker which does not exist in Indonesian language. There are two types of relative clauses, defining and non-defining relative clauses. Each type has some rules to obey. The complexity of relative clauses makes the clauses difficult to learn and to construct, hence difficult to translate.
Based on the informal interview the writer conducted on August 2009 to some senior students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University, relative clauses are still problematic for them. Translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English is difficult for them because they are confused by many relative pronouns to choose and when to use comma in the clauses, which make them difficult to produce a natural translation.
B. Problem Formulation
Considering that the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University still find difficulties in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English, the writer formulates two problems in this research. They are:
1. How is the mastery of the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English?
2. What types of errors are found in the students’ translation result of relative clauses from Indonesian into English?
C. Problem Limitation
In accordance with the problems that have been formulated above, this research will focus on the mastery and errors made by the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. Relative clauses in English are categorized into two major types, i.e. defining relative clauses and non-defining relative clauses. Each type is distinguished into four types, i.e. subject relative, object relative, possessive relative, and after-preposition relative (Yule, 2004).
translation of two types of relative clauses, i.e. subject relative and object relative, both in defining and non-defining relative clauses.
The study is focused on two main points. The two points are the students’ mastery in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English and the errors found in their translation result of relative clauses from Indonesian into English. The study was conducted to the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University of the academic year 2009/2010. The instrument that the writer used to gather the data was a test. The test result was to conclude whether the students were able to translate relative clauses from Indonesian into English or not and to find out the errors they made.
D. Research Objective
The objective of this research is to study how the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University translate relative clauses from Indonesian into English. By conducting this study, the writer intends:
1. to find out the mastery of the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English.
E. Research Benefit
The writer hopes that this study would be beneficial for many people who read this paper. This research is intended to give meaningful contribution to the study of linguistics. The writer also hopes that this research would be beneficial for teachers and students, for other researchers, and for English language education.
Since this study is a linguistics analysis, it would contribute to the study of linguistics in general. It provides an in-depth discussion on the translation of relative clauses and provides information related to the translation of relative clauses from Indonesian into English.
For teachers and teacher candidates, this research can be used as a reference for their teaching. It provides discussion on grammar field, specifically on the topic of relative clauses. The writer intentionally hopes that it would help them in teaching the topic.
For students, this study is expected to help them in learning English by providing information about relative clauses. They may use it as a reference to their study. Through this research, students would find problems which are commonly occurred and encountered by students and they can learn from those problems.
This study is also intended to contribute to the better development of English language education in Indonesia, especially for the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. It is expected that this study would help English teacher candidates to be better prepared in their professional performance.
F. Definition of Terms 1. Mastery
Mastery in language learning is considered as one of many points that a test might be characterized into (Payne, 1969). Payne (1969) further mentions that mastery is about the learners’ basic knowledge and skills. In this study, the researcher intended to find out the mastery of the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. It aimed at measuring the students’ basic knowledge of English relative clauses and tested their skills in grammar and translation.
difficulties in translating relative clauses and they have not mastered the relative clauses.
2. Relative Clauses
Relative clauses or adjectival clauses are clauses that modify nouns (Jackson, 1990). Hewings (2001) adds that a relative clause gives more information about someone or something referred to in a main clause. According to Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999) “relative clauses thus give us a means to encode complex adjectival modifiers that are easier to process than complex attributive structures and that are less wordy than two independent clauses”.
In this study, relative clauses refer to clauses that modify nouns in sentences which are shown in the research instrument, i.e. the test. The researcher intends to discuss relative clauses from Indonesian into English. English, as the target language, has many relative pronouns to describe relative clauses. The various types of the relative pronouns often bring confusion to Indonesian learners, especially when translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English.
3. Translation
equivalent receptor language text.” According to Bell (1991), translation is “the expressions in another language of what has been expressed in another.” In this study, translation is seen as a process of linguistic and cultural adaptation. The students were to translate relative clauses from Indonesian into English through a test. Here, translation is used to test the students’ mastery of relative clauses. As Purpura (2004) states:
… at one point in time, knowledge of grammar was assessed through the ability to recite rules; at another, through the ability to extrapolate a rule from samples of the target language; and yet another, knowledge of grammar was tested through the ability to provide an accurate translation.
4. The Fifth Semester Students
The participants of this study were the fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. The fifth semester students are chosen based on their competency in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English, in relation to their taking Structure V and Translation I in the fifth semester.
5. Indonesian
6. English
11 CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter consists of two parts, i.e. theoretical description and
theoretical framework. Theoretical description elucidates the theories underlying
the study. Theoretical framework elucidates how the theories counterpart the
study.
A. Theoretical Description
At this point, the writer elaborates some relevant theories underlying the
study. In relation to the first research question, the writer felt the need to give an
account for theory about grammar mastery. Since the focus of this study is
analyzing the translation of relative clauses, thus the elucidation of translation
theories should be stated here. Theories of relative clauses are also essential to be
presented. Nevertheless, the writer would also convey some theories of error
analysis in relation to the second research question.
1. Grammar Mastery
Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999) concur that “teachers will be
better prepared to meet their students’ learning needs if they have a firm
grounding in the grammar of the language they are teaching.” As future teachers
of English language to Indonesian learners, it is important for the fifth semester
master grammar, including relative clauses, and be able to translate relative
clauses from Indonesian into English.
Mastery in language learning is considered as one of many points that a
test might be characterized into (Payne, 1969). Payne (1969) further mentions that
mastery is about the learners’ basic knowledge and skills. Bloom as cited in Kulik
(1969) says that
If students are normally distributed in aptitude for a subject and all receive exactly the same instruction for the same amount of time, then, the end result will be a normal distribution on achievement in the subject. The final differences in achievement will reflect the initial differences in aptitude.
In this study, the researcher intended to find out the mastery of the fifth
semester students in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. It
aimed at measuring the students’ basic knowledge of English relative clauses and
tested their skills in grammar and translation.
In relation to the study, one is said to have mastered relative clauses if he
or she understands the rules of relative clauses and is able to use relative clauses
correctly in sentences. As it is written in Peraturan Akademik Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta (2002), the minimum standard of mastery is fifty-six percent (56%), while the overall grading system is determined by the lecturers. The
following is the list of score category which is used to classify the students’
Table 2.1 List of Score Category
Score Category 80-100 very good (A)
70-79 good (B)
56-69 sufficient (C)
50-55 insufficient (D)
≤ 49 poor (E)
Based on the list above, if the students’ scores are below the minimum
standard of mastery, it means that they still have difficulties in translating relative
clauses and they have not mastered the relative clauses.
2. Translation Theory
This study focuses on the students’ translation result of relative clauses
from Indonesian into English. Hence, the elucidation of the translation theory
underlined the study should be presented here. Here, the writer elaborates the
definition of translation, kinds of translation, and criteria of a good translation.
a. Definition of Translation
In defining translation, Bassnett (1991) states:
translation involves the transfer of ‘meaning’ contained in one set of language signs into another set of language signs through competent use of the dictionary and grammar, the process involves a whole set of extra-linguistic criteria also.
Meanwhile, Catford (1974) defines translation as the replacement of textual
(TL). According to Larson (SIL International), translation is “a process based on
the theory that it is possible to abstract the meaning of a text from its forms and
reproduce that meaning with the very different forms of a second language”.
Koller as cited in Hatim (2001) defines translation as “the result of a
text-processing activity, by means of which a source-language text is transposed into a
target-language text”. Further, he states that between the resultant text in L2 (the
target-language text) and the source text in L1 (the source-language text) there
exist a relationship, which can be designated as a translational, or equivalence
relation.
Nida and Taber (1974) add that translation “consists in reproducing in the
receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message,
first in terms of meaning and second in terms of style.” There are many similar
definition of translation proposed by linguists around the globe. As a conclusion,
translation is reproducing the message of the text from source language into target
language without changing the meaning of the text. In this study, the source
language is Indonesian and the target language is English.
b. Kinds of Translation
Larson (1984) classifies translation into two types, i.e. form-based
translations and meaning-based translations. Form-based translations make every
effort to follow the form of the source language. It is also called as literal
unduly free idiomatic near idiomatic inconsistent mixture
modified literal literal very literal
the source language text in the natural forms of the receptor language. This kind
of translations is called idiomatic translations.
Larson (1984) suggests good translations are often a mixture of literal
translation of the grammatical units and the idiomatic translation of the meaning
of the text. Moreover, Larson proposed a set of translation continuum as seen in
the figure below:
Figure 2.1 Continuum Stages of Translation According to Larson (1984)
From the figure above, translators’ goal is to achieve idiomatic stage. In this stage,
the result is idiomatic translation, in which the meaning in the source language
text does not change in the target language text. This stage also produces a natural
translation in the target language style. Unduly free translation is not considered to
be acceptable translation for most purposes because this kind of translation often
omits and adds the content of the text during the translation from the source
language into the target language, hence often changes the meaning.
c. Criteria of a Good Translation
From many theories about translation, many linguists seem to agree to
the criteria of a good translation. To meet the criteria of a good translation, a
translation result should be accurate and natural. To make an accurate and natural
translation needs a long process of preliminary and on-going study of the project.
In this study, the participants were required to make a good translation as
described above. Because the goal is to produce an idiomatic translation, accuracy
and naturalness of the participants’ translation of relative clauses from Indonesian
into English are taken into account.
3. Relative Clauses
Since this study discusses the translation of relative clauses from
Indonesian into English, there are two viewpoints will be stated, relative clauses
in English and relative clauses in Indonesian.
a. Relative Clauses in English
Relative clauses in English are also known as adjective clauses. A
relative clause is a clause that modifies a noun. Hewings (2001) states it “gives
more information about someone or something referred to in a main clause”.
English relative clauses are categorized into two major types, i.e. defining relative
1) Defining Relative Clauses
One of the types of relative clauses is defining relative clauses. A
defining relative clause, also called restrictive relative clause, describes “the
preceding noun in such a way as to distinguish it from other nouns of the same
class” (Thomson and Martinet, 1995). According to Graver (1984), this kind of
relative clause is “an essential part of the whole definitions, and cannot be omitted
if the sentence as a whole is to make useful sense”. For example:
(a) A conductor is a person who collects fares on a bus or tram.
In the example above (a), the words in italic is the relative clause. If we omit the
relative clause, the sentence will be unclear and the sentence will be incomplete,
as stated below:
(b) A conductor is a person.
In (b) the sentence is not clear because the meaning of ‘a person’ is too general. ‘A person’ is not always a conductor. Thus, the defining relative clause gives a clear understanding of the noun, as in the example (a). Example (a) and (b) are
taken from Graver (1984). Hewings (2001) adds that defining relative clauses “are
used to specify which person or thing we mean, or which type of person or thing we mean”. Therefore, there is no need to use comma here.
Defining relative clauses may describe a noun as subject or object. In
constructing defining relative clauses, there are relative pronouns that can be used.
describe both person and things. Nonetheless, it is common to omit the relative
pronoun as in the following example taken from Hewings (2001):
(c) He showed me the rocks (which/that) he had brought back from Australia.
(d) He showed me therocks hehad brought back fromAustralia.
In (c), the relative pronouns in the brackets can be omitted (example (d)) without
changing the meaning of the sentence. However, this omission can only be
applied if the position of the relative pronoun in the sentence is as object relative,
while it cannot be applied in contradiction if the position of the relative pronoun
in the sentence is as subject relative.
Relative pronoun that is only used in defining relative clauses. This special relative pronoun may also be used to refer to subject and object after the
words something and anything. Words such as all, little, much, no and none used as nouns and superlatives may also used relative pronoun that. Relative pronoun which is also used to describe the same thing, but it less commonly occurs.
2) Non-defining Relative Clause
The other type of relative clauses is non-defining relative clauses, also
known as non-restrictive relative clauses. Thomson and Martinet (1995) state
“Non-defining relative clauses are placed after nouns which are definite already”.
Contrasting to defining relative clauses, non-defining relative clauses are enclosed
restrictive relatives most obviously in that they are spoken with an intonational
break (like parentheticals)”. See example below:
(e) Peter, who had been driving all day, suggested stopping at the next town. (Thomson and Martinet, 1995)
In example (e) the words in italics is the relative clause. Non-defining relative
clause does not modify the nouns but solely gives additional information to the
noun. If we omit the relative clause in that sentence, the sentence is still complete.
See the following example:
(f) Peter suggested stopping at the next town.
In non-defining relative clause, the relative pronoun cannot be omitted.
Relative pronouns used in this construction are who, whom, and which. Relative pronouns who (subject) and who/whom (object) describe person, while which describe things. Non-defining relative clauses are formal forms and commonly
found in written English.
3) Other Types of Relative
There are other relative pronouns used in relative clauses construction.
They are whose, when, where, etc. Relative pronoun whose is used to show possessive (Azar, 1989). Example as follows:
(g) I know the man whose bicycle was stolen.
replaced by a phrase with preposition + which. See how the example (g) and (h) below differ without changing the meaning.
(h) This was the place where we first met. (Informal) (i) This was the place at/in which we first met. (Formal)
4) Zero Relative Clauses
As stated before in defining relative clauses, it is common to omit the
relative pronoun in the relative clauses (See example (d)). The omission of the
relative pronoun in relative clause construction thus is called zero relative clauses,
usually indicated with the symbol ‘ø’.
Zero relative clauses can only occur in defining relative clauses
positioned as object relative. It cannot occur in the defining relative clauses
positioned as subject relative. It also cannot occur in the non-defining relative
clauses. In conclusion, the uses of relative pronouns are shown in the following
table:
Table 2.2 Uses of Relative Pronouns (Yule, 2004)
Subject relative
Object
relative After-preposition relative
Possessive relatives Fronted Stranded
who ø (to) which ø … (to) whose
that that (to) whom that … (to) of which
which which who … (to)
whom which … (to)
b. Relative Clauses in Indonesian
called subordinate clause. Klausa sematan marks some of relationships between clauses, such as conditional relationship, causal relationship, showing-time
relationship, attributive relationship, etc. Indonesian relative clauses assign
attributive relationship whereas the subordinate clause (klausa sematan) serves as a modifier (pewatas) to the nouns. It is called as an attributive modifier, using subordinator ‘yang’. For example:
(j) Pamannya yang tinggal di Bogor meninggal kemarin. (Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 1988)
~ His uncle who lives in Bogor died yesterday.
(k) Istrinya, yang datang bersama dengan dia itu, seorang insinyur. (Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 1988)
~ His wife, who came with him, is an engineer.
(m) Makalah yang ditulis oleh para mahasiswa (itu) menyinggung perasaan Rektor. (Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 1988)
~ The paper which is written by the students hurt the Dean’s feelings. From the examples above ((j), (k), and (m)), it is clear that the
subordinator ‘yang’ represents both person and things, unlike English relative pronouns which differ from one relative clause into another in terms of the nouns
being modified.
There are two types of Indonesian relative clauses (Departemen
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 1988). Similar to the English relative clauses, the
relative clause, while (k) is the example of non-restrictive relative clause. Like the
English relative clauses, the two types are distinguished by commas. Restrictive
relative clauses as seen in (j) and (m) use no commas, while non-restrictive
relative clause in (k) use commas.
Also part of the modifier subordinate clause (klausa sematan pewatas) is the possesive subordinate clause (klausa sematan posesif). In English, this is represented by the relative pronoun whose, while in Indonesian it is still described by subordinator ‘yang’. This construction is marked by the adding of particle –nya to the nouns which is placed after subordinator ‘yang’. See the example below:
(n) Para pegawai yang gajinya kecil tidak wajib memberi sumbangan. (Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 1988)
(o) The employees, whose salary is small, are not obligatory giving donation.
4. Error Analysis
This study investigates students’ errors in translating relative clauses from
Indonesian into English. Thus, it is essential to state some theories of errors in
second language acquisition.
a. Description of Error
In language learning, students committing errors is inevitably. Dulay,
Burt, and Krashen (1982) affirm that “Errors are the flawed side of learner speech
Gass and Selinker (2001), similar to slip of the tongues mistakes are generally
occur once, while an error is systematic that it may take place time after time
without being noticed by the learner.
There are two main purposes of studying learners’ errors (Dulay, et. al, 1982):
1) it provides data from which interferences about the nature of the language learning process can be made
2) it 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 learner’s ability to communicate effectively. (Dulay, et. al, 1982)
Erdoğan (2005) states there are two major sources of errors. They are interlingual
transfer and intralingual transfer. Further, Erdoğan explains interlingual transfer as
to be the result of language transfer caused by the learner’s first language, known
as interference. It may cover the errors of phonological, morphological,
grammatical, and lexica-semantic elements transfer from source language into
target language. On the other hand, intralingual errors happen as a result of the
learner’s inadequate knowledge and experience of the target language, for
example simplification and over generalization.
b. Errors Categorization
Errors are classified based on language components and particular
linguistic constituent affected by errors (Dulay, et al, 1982). Language components take account of phonology (pronunciation), syntax and morphology
(style). On the other hand, constituents include the elements that comprise each
language component. Additionally, Dulay, et al. state the most common errors are:
1) Omitting grammatical morphemes e.g.: He hit car.
2) Double marking e.g.: (past tense)
She didn’t went back. 3) Regularizing rules
e.g.: womans for women 4) Using archiforms
e.g.: I see her yesterday. Her dance with my father. 5) Using two or more forms in random alternation
e.g.: the random use of he and she regardless of the gender of the person of interest
6) Misordering
e.g.: What you are doing?
They are all the time late. (Dulay, et al, 1982)
Because of the time limit, in this study the writer simplified the categories.
However, the categorization that the writer proposed here still adapts Dulay’s
basic categorization. The writer attempts to relate it to the subject being discussed,
i.e. relative clauses and the translation of the relative clauses. The categorization is
shown in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3 The Categorization of Errors
Errors in Relative Clauses Errors in Translation
Errors in Relative Pronoun Use
Errors in Comma Use
Grammatical
B. Theoretical Framework
There are two research problems to answer in this research. In answering
the two research questions the writer used the aforementioned theories.
The first research question seek to find out the mastery of the fifth
semester students in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. In
answering the question, the researcher used a test as the instrument to gather the
data. In analysing the data, the writer referred to the list of score category in Table
2.2 to determine the participants’ mastery. The score category was based on
Peraturan Akademik Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta (2002).
In scoring the test, the writer corrected participants’ works based on the
theory of relative clauses stated above, especially the theory of English relative
clauses stated by Azar (1989), Hewings (2001), Graver (1984), and Thomson and
Martinet (1995). The essence of the first research question was not solely on the
participants’ ability in constructing relative clauses but more in their ability in
translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. In analyzing the
participants’ translation, the writer referred to the aforementioned continuum
stages of translation proposed by Larson (1984). The goal of a good translation
according to Larson was an idiomatic (natural) translation.
The data of the test was also used to answer the second research question.
First, the writer categorized the errors using the error categorization adapted from
categorization of errors by Dulay et al (1982), based on the most common errors
to occur. Second, after categorizing the errors the writer examined the types of
relative clauses, especially the theory of English relative clauses. The result of the
whole translation of the participants’ work in one sentence was examined based
on the Larson’s theory of translation and his continuum stages of translation. The
categorization of the participants’ erroneous answers can be seen completely in
27 CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY
This chapter elaborates the rationale of the methods of the research and
analysis. It covers six sections. The sections are method used in this study,
participants of the study, instruments to gather the data, technique of gathering the
data, technique of analyzing the data, and procedure of the research.
A. Research Method
This study is a descriptive qualitative research. Sprinthall, Schmutte, and
Sirois (1991) mention that when the primary objective of the research is
description and not looking for differences between groups or relationship among
variables, then the research is typically called descriptive. This study seeks to find
out the mastery of the fifth semester students of the English Language Education
Study Program of Sanata Dharma University in translating relative clauses from
Indonesian into English. The writer also intends to uncover the problems that they
came upon when doing the translation.
This study was aimed at answering two research questions. The first
research question tried to find out the fifth semester students’ mastery in
translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. The second research
question seek find out types of errors found in the fifth semester students’
This research would not only describe the findings but also dig deeper
from the data gathered. After gathering the data, the writer examined the findings
to find out the core problems causing the students’ making errors in doing
translation of relative clauses in English. Consequently, this research is a
qualitative study.
In accommodating the study, the writer used survey method using one
qualitative instrument to gather the data. The instrument was a test. The test was
intended to answer the two research problems.
B. Research Participants
The participants of this study were the fifth semester students of the
English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University, of the
academic year of 2009/2010. It would not be feasible to study the entire
population which consists of all members of the fifth semester students.
Therefore, the writer decided to select a sample as the representative of the entire
population. The sample was a portion of the entire population of the fifth semester
students which was chosen based on the participants attending the test, taken from
two classes.
The participants were chosen because they are regarded as senior students
who were considered to have learned and internalized some Basic English
structure, including relative clauses. As senior students, the fifth semester
students’ are expected to be able to construct complex sentences using relative
students that they learned to translate relative clauses from Indonesian into
English in that semester.
Other reason was in the following semester, the students are going to have
their practice teaching in Micro Teaching course and Program Pengalaman Lapangan. These programs require them to master grammar topics, at least those included in the junior and high school curriculum. One of the topics is relative
clauses. In order to be able to deliver and explain the topics to Indonesian
learners, these teacher candidates need to be able to master translating relative
clauses from Indonesian into English.
C. Research Instrument
In carrying out the study, the writer constructed a test as the instrument. A
test is “a method of measuring a person’s ability, knowledge, or performance in a
given domain” (Brown: 2004). In relation to the study, the writer constructed a
translation test consisting twenty items. The twenty items consist of sentences
containing relative clauses that should be translated from Indonesian into English.
The items were taken from reliable sources, i.e. grammar textbooks, such as Fabb
(1994), Graver (1984), Hewings (2001), Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman
(1999), and Yule (2004). The test was intended to answer the two research
questions.
As to make the research valid and reliable, the instrument also has to be
of the test that the writer used. The writer also presents the scoring procedure for
the test.
1. Validity of the Test
Gronlund as cited in Brown (2004) says that validity is “the extent to
which inferences made from assessment results are appropriate, meaningful, and
useful in terms of the purpose of the assessment”. Hughes (1989) states “a test is
said to be valid if it measures accurately what it is intended to measure”. Further,
he argues there are four types of test validity, namely content validity,
criterion-related validity, construct validity, and face validity.
To found out whether the test that the writer constructed was valid and
reliable the writer conducted a pilot test on November 19, 2009 in Structure V
Class. From the result of the pilot test, it was found that the test only covers three
out of the four types of validity. The following is the description of the validity
that the test covered.
a) Content Validity
Content validity refers to the content of the instrument, which is the test.
Hughes (1989) states that content validity constitutes “a representative sample of
the language skills, structures, etc. with which it is meant to be concerned.”
Further, Hughes argues that the content validity of a test can be seen from the
From the result of the pilot test, the writer found that the test used in this
study covered the content validity. The test in this study was to measure the
students’ mastery in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English and
to find out errors that they made when doing the translation. The content of the
test specifies on grammar element, i.e. relative clauses. The participants were to
translate twenty items (sentences) in the test from Indonesian into English. All
sentences in the test contained relative clause.
The test in this research covered content validity because the participants
were able to do the test. The participant could do the test because they were
familiar with the constructions. It was shown from the test result.
b) Construct Validity
A test is said to have construct validity if “it can demonstrate that it
measures just the ability which it is supposed to measure” (Hughes, 1989). The
test in this study was designed to measure the mastery of the fifth semester
students’ in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English.
From the result of the pilot test, the test used in this study has the construct
validity. It was intended to measure the fifth semester students’ mastery on
grammar and translation. The fifth semester students are considered to have
learned and internalized the construction of relative clauses and the translation of
relative clauses from Indonesian into English in their courses, hence were able to
c) Face Validity
Face validity covers the looks of the test. If it looks as if it measures what it is intended to measure then it has face validity (Hughes, 1989). Since the test
used in this study measures students’ mastery in translating relative clauses from
Indonesian into English, it was constructed in form of sentences. The students
were to rewrite while translate the test items from Indonesian into English.
From the result of the pilot test, the writer found that the participants could
understand clearly how to do the test and thus were able to do it. It means that the
participants knew what to do when they got the test sheets. The looks of the test
can be seen in the appendices (See appendix F).
2. Reliability of the Test
Discussing reliability of a test, Brown (2004) suggests that it should be
“consistent and dependable”. While validity concerns on accuracy, reliability is
about consistency. A test is said to be reliable when it gives a more or less the
same overcome when it is administered to the same subjects on different occasion.
Ebel (1979) states that “there are at least five methods have been used for
obtaining the independent measurements necessary for estimating test reliability.”
The methods are reader reliability, test-retest, equivalent forms, split-halves, and
Kuder-Richardson. The test that the writer conducted used the split-halves
method. According to Ebel (1979), in split-halves method the test was split into
estimate reliability. This method is simpler than the other methods because it
requires only one administration of one test.
A test is said to be reliable if it yields the same result when the test
administered to the same students or matched students on two different occasions
(Brown, 2004). Thus, the split-halves method, although only administered once,
gives the students two scores on the test. The two scores are derived from the two
halves of the test. The first half scores are from odd numbered items, which then
labelled X. The other half scores are from even numbered items, then labelled Y.
The distribution of the test items can be seen in the blueprint of the test (See
Appendix E).
In determining the reliability of the test used in this study, the writer used
the Pearson product moment coefficient of correlation to estimate the correlation
between the two-halves. The formula is shown below:
where
r = Pearson r
ΣX = sum of scores in X-distribution ΣY = sum of scores in Y-distribution
ΣXY = sum of the products of paired X- and Y-scores ΣX2 = sum of the squared scores in X-distribution ΣY2
After estimating the correlation between the two-halves, the writer estimated the
reliability of the split-half test using the Spearman-Brown split-half reliability
formula. The following is the formula of the Spearman-Brown split-half reliability
estimate:
where:
= the Spearman-Brown split-half reliability estimate
= the correlation between the two halves
To determine the reliability of the test, the writer conducted a pilot test.
The preliminary test was conducted in November 19, 2009 in Structure V Class.
The time allocation was 45 minutes from 9 o’clock until 9.45 in the morning.
There were thirty students carried out the test, including the shoppers. Out of the
thirty students there were eighteen students from the fifth semester. The other
twelve were shoppers (students other than the fifth semester).
The writer used the test result of the eighteen students to estimate the
reliability of the test. The result of the pilot test showed that reliability score for
the test was 0.31, which means the test was reliable. The participants’ score in the
pilot test and the computation of the test reliability can be seen in the appendices
3. The Scoring Procedure for the Test
The scoring procedure for the test was based on the point being measured,
i.e. the students’ translation of relative clauses from Indonesian into English.
There were 20 items (sentences) to translate in the test. The goal of each item was
a natural translation, or as Larson (1984) said, an idiomatic translation. The points
to consider were correctness (grammatical) and naturalness (meaning).
Based on the points above, the score for each item is one (1) for the correct
translation and zero (0) for the incorrect one. If the student answer correctly all
the 20 items, the maximum score the student can get was 100, derived from the
total 20 correct answers multiplied by 5.
D. Data Gathering Technique
To obtain the data, the writer distributed a test to the participants. The
participants were the fifth semester students of the English Language Education
Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. The test then distributed to two
classes, regardless the non-fifth semester students. Out of the population of the
whole fifth-semester students, the writer took sixty four students as the sample.
Those sixty four students were all the fifth semester students who were chosen
randomly based on their taking part in doing the test.
As stated before, the test was conducted in two classes. They were
Translation Class and Morphosyntax Class. The test in both classes were
conducted on Tuesday, November 24, 2009 at 10.00 – 10.45 for Translation Class
There were 36 students in Translation Class and 44 students in Morphosyntax
Class attending the test. From the total 80 students, 64 of them are the fifth
semester students while the rest are shoppers.
Before administering the test, the writer asked for permission to the
lecturers who teach in the chosen classes. On the day the participants did the test,
the writer did not solely distribute the test but also monitor the process. The time
allotment for the test was forty-five minutes. After the test was administered, the
writer sorted the fifth semester students’ works from the other students from the
non-fifth semester students. Then, the writer checked their works and analysed
them using the key answers and scoring criteria.
E. Data Analysis Technique
The instrument in this study, i.e. a test, was to gather the data needed.
After gathering the data, the writer examined the findings from the test. In
analysing the test, the writer firstly checked the sample’s works one by one. After
checking each number of each sample’s work, the writer then scored the test.
After the scoring done, the writer examined the errors in their works then
distinguishes the errors according to the types of error as discussed in Chapter II.
F. Research Procedures
The completion of this research followed some procedures. The
1. Studying Related Literature
Library study or book research was done to collect information from
written sources related to relative clauses and translation. It was also done to
check the syllabus of the fifth semester students of the English Language
education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.
2. Designing the Test
As stated above, this study used a test as the instrument. After doing the
library research, the writer designed a test. Then the test was distributed to the
participants to collect the data.
3. Collecting Data
The data were collected from the test designed. The test was conducted to
two classes. They were Translation Class and Morphosyntax Class. The test was
distributed to all students including the shoppers (students who are not the fifth
semester students.). After the data was collected, only the result of the fifth
semester students were examined and used in this study.
4. Analyzing and Interpreting the Data
As stated before, the data for this study were collected through a test. After
collecting data from the test, the writer discussed the findings. Firstly, the writer
5. Reporting the Result
After stating all the findings, interpreting the data, and discussing the
problems, the writer came to the conclusion. This includes the summary of the
39
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter elaborates the findings of the study from the data gathered
and discusses the findings further. It is divided into two parts, namely students’
mastery in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English and students’
errors in translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English.
A. Students’ Mastery in Translating Relative Clauses from Indonesian into English
The first research question seeks to find out the students’ mastery in
translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. Their mastery can be
seen from their translation result in the test the writer had conducted. The test was
conducted to two classes of the fifth semester students of the English Language
Study Program of Sanata Dharma University, on November 24 and November 26,
2009. The test consists of only one part. The students were required to translate
sentences from Indonesian into English. There were 20 items to translate in the
test. The total students who became the participants were 64 students. The
Table 4.1 The Summary of the Students’ Achievement in the Test
Range of Final Score
Number of Participants
Achieving the Range of Scores Percentage
90 – 100 - 0%
80 – 89 1 2%
70 – 79 4 6%
60 – 69 4 6%
50 – 59 8 13%
40 – 49 17 27%
30 – 39 18 28%
≤ 29 12 19%
TOTAL 64 100%
In the test, the correct answer on each number was scored one (1) and the
incorrect one was scored zero (0). Hence, the maximum total score on the test was
20. Then, the final score was multiplied by 5 thus reach a maximum final score of
100. The categorization of mastery of the participants’ test result was based on
Peraturan Akademik Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta (2002).
From table 4.1, it can be seen that there was no participant (0%) achieved
the score which falls on the range of 90 – 100. There were 12 participants
achieved the lowest score on the range of 0 – 29. There was only one participant
(2%) achieved the scores on the range of 80 – 89. Four participants (6%) were on
the range of 70 – 79, the same number of participants were on the range of 60 –
69. On the range of 50 – 59, there were eight (13%) participants. Seventeen (27%)
participants were on the range of 40 – 49. Most participants obtained the scores on
the range of 30 – 39. There were eighteen (28%) participants who were in this
According to Peraturan Akademik Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta (2002:14), the minimum standard of mastery is fifty-six percent (56%). The
complete list of the category is shown in chapter 2, table 2.1. Based on the scoring
category, the students who achieved 56% of the highest score are classified into
the category of sufficient (C). If the students only achieved 50% of the highest
score, they are classified into the category of insufficient (D). The minimum score
for the category of good (B) and very good (A) is determined by the lecturers. The
scoring category above was applied to classify the students’ achievement in the
test. The students’ scores in relation to the category of mastery are presented in
Table 4.2 below.
Table 4.2 The Participants’ Score in Relation to the Category of Mastery
Score Category of Mastery Number of Participants
Achieving the Category Percentage
80 – 100 very good (A) 1 1.56%
70 – 79 good (B) 4 6.25%
56 – 69 sufficient (C) 4 6.25% 50 – 55 insufficient (D) 8 12.50%
≤ 49 poor (E) 47 73.44%
TOTAL 64 100%
From Table 4.2 it was clear that there was only one participant (1.56%)
in the category very good (A). There were four participants (6.25%) in the category good (B), as well as in category sufficient (C). Eight participants (12.50%) were in category insufficient (D). The biggest number was in category
poor (E). There were forty-seven participants (73.44%) in this category. In short,
minimum standard of mastery. The other 55 participants (86%) are included in
Category D and E, which is below the minimum standard of mastery.
To determine the level of the participants’ mastery on translating relative
clauses from Indonesian into English, the writer used the measurement of central
tendency using descriptive statistics. The measurement of central tendency
consists of the computation of the average score of the test (mean), mid score of
the test (median), and the most frequent score in the test result (mode). In this
study, the writer only needed the computation of the average score of the test
(mean) to determine the level of participants’ mastery on translating relative
clauses from Indonesian into English.
The computation of mean is derived from adding all of the participants’
final score, divided by the total number of the participants. Thus, the computation
of the mean is as follows:
mean: ′
h h 0.
Figure 4.1 The Computation of the Participants’ Average Score of the Test
It is shown above that the mean score, or the average of the total correct
answers achieved by each participant, was 40.3. The score was below the
minimum standard of mastery, which is 56%. This result indicates that most of the
fifth semester students of the academic year 2009/2010 have insufficient mastery
in translating relative clauses and thus are unable to produce a natural (idiomatic)
B. Types of Errors found in the Students’ Translation Result of Relative Clauses from Indonesian into English
The second research question seeks to find out the students’ errors in
translating relative clauses from Indonesian into English. In answering the
question the writer categorized the errors into two major types according to the
subject being studied, i.e. relative clauses construction and the translation of
relative clauses. The error categorization adapts the categorization of errors
proposed by Dulay et al. (1982).
1. Students’ Errors in Relative Clauses Construction
Students’ errors in constructing relative clauses are divided into two parts
based on the two points being analyzed. The two parts are errors in relative
pronoun and errors in comma use. These points are considered to be essential
features of relative clauses, hence influence the participants’ production of relative
clauses.
a. Errors in Relative Pronouns
As stated before, one of the difficulties in learning relative clauses is
because there are many kinds of relative pronouns used in the construction of
relative clauses in English. This often causes students making errors because of
the complexity of the relative pronouns.
From the result of the test the writer had conducted, the participants
The percentage of the participants’ errors in relative pronouns in the test can be
seen in Table 4.3 below.
Table 4.3 Percentage of Errors in Relative Pronouns
Error in Subject Relative
Categ
o
ry
Relative Pronoun
The First Half The Equal Half
Item No Correct Incorrect Item No Correct Incorrect
Def
Error in Object Relative
Catego
ry
Relative Pronoun
The First Half The Equal Half
Item No Correct Incorrect Item No Correct Incorrect
Defini
1) Errors in Subject Relative Pronouns
In the blueprint of the test, it is shown the distribution of the relative
