INVESTIGATING GRAMMATICAL INTERFERENCE IN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ TRANSLATION.

(1)

INVESTIGATING GRAMMATICAL INTERFERENCE IN

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ TRANSLATION

A PAPER

Submitted to the Department of English Education of Faculty of Language and

Literature Education of Education in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

Sarjana Pendidikan Degree.

WAHYU BUDI RIYANDA

1009084

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE EDUCATION

INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

(2)

INVESTIGATING GRAMMATICAL

INTERFERENCE IN JUNIOR HIGH

SCHOOL STUDENTS’ TRANS

LATION

Oleh

Wahyu Budi Riyanda

Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Januari 2015

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

Skripsi ini tidak boleh diperbanyak seluruhya atau sebagian,

(3)

WAHYU BUDI RIYANDA

INVESTIGATING GRAMMATICAL INTERFERENCE IN

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’

TRANSLATION

APPROVED BY:

Main Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Didi Suherdi, M.Ed., NIP. 196211011987121001

Co-Supervisor

Dr. H. Odo Fadloely, M.A NIP. 195408041977021001

Head of English Education Department

Faculty of Language and Arts Education

Indonesia University of Education

(4)

Wahyu Budi Riyanda, 2015

Investigating grammatical interference in junior high school students translation

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

ABSTRACT

Investigating Grammatical Interference in Junior High School Students’

Translations.

This study is conducted to investigate grammatical interference that junior high school students encounter using Indonesia-English translation. The study uses descriptive-qualitative design, using error analysis as the tool of data analysis. The study is conducted in a public junior high school in Bandung with 36 eight graders as the participants. The main data of this study are collected from three times in-class observation, the students’ Indonesia-English translations and interview. The findings reveal that the most frequent grammatical interference that

is experienced by the students is the absence of morpheme “s” in plural forms.

The probable factor that contributes to its occurrence is the non-existence of English interaction which is evident through classroom observation. In addition, the students also confess their difficulties in learning English which are memorizing verb changes (tense), pronunciation, memorizing vocabulary and lack of motivation to communicate in English.

Keywords: Second Language Acquisition, Negative Language Transfer,

(5)

ABSTRAK

Penelitian ini dilaksanakan untuk menginvestigasi Grammatical Interference yang dialami siswa sekolah menengah pertama dengan menggunakan terjemahan Indonesia-Inggris. Desain penelitian ini adalah kualitatif-deskriptif, menggunakan Error Analysis sebagai alat analisis data. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan di salah satu sekolah menengah pertama di Bandung dengan partisipan sebanyak 36 siswa kelas delapan. Data utama dari penelitian ini diperoleh dari tiga kali observasi dalam kelas, terjemahan Indonesia-Inggris dari siswa, dan wawancara. Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa Grammatical Interference yang paling sering dialami oleh siswa adalah ketiadaan morfim “s” dalam bentuk jamak. Faktor yang memungkinkan munculnya Grammatical Interference tersebut adalah tidak adanya interaksi menggunakan Bahasa Inggris di dalam kelas yang terlihat dalam observasi kelas. Siswa-siswa di dalam penelitian ini juga menyampaikan bahwa mereka memiliki kesulitan dalam mempelajari Bahasa Inggris yaitu menghafal perubahan kata kerja (Tense), pengucapan, menghafal kosa kata, dan kurang motivasi untuk berkomunikasi menggunakan Bahasa Inggris.

Kata Kunci: Penguasaan Bahasa Kedua, Transfer Negatif Bahasa, Grammatical

(6)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT

DEFINED.

PREFACE ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. ACKNOWLEDGMENT ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. ABSTRACT ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. TABLE OF CONTENTS ... I LIST OF TABLES ... III CHAPTER I ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. INTRODUCTION ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. Introduction ... Error! Bookmark not defined. Background of the Research ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 1.

The Research Questions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 2.

The Research Objectives ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 3.

The Significance of the Research ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 4.

Scope of the Research ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 5.

The Research Methodology ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 6.

1.6.1 Design of the Research ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.6.2 Participant ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.6.3 The Data Collection Techniques ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.6.4 Data Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Clarification of Terms ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 7.

Organization of the Paper ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 8.

Concluding Remark ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. 9.

CHAPTER II ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. 2.1 Translating... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2. 1. 1. Text Styles of Translating ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2. 1. 2. The Process of Translating... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2. 1. 3. The Methods of Translating ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.2 Second Language Acquisition ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.3 Language Transfer... Error! Bookmark not defined.

(7)

ii

2.4 Grammatical Interference ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.5 Interlanguage... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.6 Error Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.7 Second Language Teaching ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.7.1 Interaction ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.7.2 Motivation ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.8 The Distinctive Systems between Bahasa Indonesia and English Error!

Bookmark not defined.

2.8.1 Possessive Pronoun ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.8.2 “To be” before Adjective ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.8.3 Word Order ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.8.4 Subject-verb Agreement ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.8.5 Tense ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.8.6 Plural Form ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.9 Previous Researches... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.10 Concluding Remark ... Error! Bookmark not defined. CHAPTER III ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. 3.1 The Research Method ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2 The Research Site ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.2.1 Setting ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2.2 Participant ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.3 Data Collection Techniques ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.3.1 Students’ Translation Collection... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.3.2 Classroom Observation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.3.3 Interview ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.4 Data Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.5 Concluding Remark ... Error! Bookmark not defined. CHAPTER IV ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. 4.1 Findings ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.1.1 The students’ translation collection ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.2 Classroom Observation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.3 Interview ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2 Discussion... Error! Bookmark not defined.

(8)

iii

4.2.3 Discussion of interview... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.3 Concluding Remark ... Error! Bookmark not defined. CHAPTER V ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT

DEFINED.

5.1 Conclusions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.2 Recommendations ... Error! Bookmark not defined. BIBLIOGRAPHY ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDICES……… 59

LIST OF TABLES

Table. 4.1 Error Analysis ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

Table. 4.2 An Erroneous Sentence In Absence Of Morpheme “S” In Plural Forms ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

Table. 4.3 Erroneous Sentences In Wrong Use Of Tense ERROR! BOOKMARK

NOT DEFINED.

Table. 4.4 Erroneous Sentences In Wrong Subject-Verb Agreement ... ERROR!

BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

Table 4.5 Erroneous Sentences In Wrong Word Order ... ERROR! BOOKMARK

NOT DEFINED.

Table 4.6 An Erroneous Sentence In Absence Of “To Be” Before Adjective

... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

Table. 4.7 An Erroneous Sentence In Wrong Possessive Pronoun ... ERROR!

(9)

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure. 4.1 Distribution Of Grammatical Errors .... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT

DEFINED.

Figure. 4.2 Rank Of Interlingual Errors ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT

(10)

5

(11)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

This chapter provides a brief depiction of the whole contents of the research

which includes the statement of the problem, the aim of the research, and also the

significance of the research including the scope. Other than that this chapter will

present the clarification of the term and paper organization as well.

Background of the Research 1. 1.

As the world keeps on developing, English mastery becomes one of important

necessities to maintain a good communication with other people. To acquire

English and maintain communication successfully using it, the ability to translate

native language to English is required. Hambali (2011) explains that whether or

not someone can maintain successful communication depends on his/her ability in

translating. However, since the students in junior high school did not have enough

exposures in English before they get in it, there is a high tendency that

interlanguage process might happen when the students translate their native

language to English and of course, this might be a problem.

Selinker (as cited in Tarone, 2006), was the first to introduce the term „interlanguage‟ as a distinctive linguistic system shown when an adult second language learner efforts to utter meanings in the language they are learning. When

someone is trying to acquire Target Language (TL), they establish their own

system of the language that is mostly influenced by their Native Language (NL).

Saville-Troike (2006) considered interlanguage involves „transfer‟, that is an

(12)

She further categorized this transfer into two types, positive and negative

transfer. According to her, positive transfer is that which assists TL learning since

the structure or rule in NL also works in TL, thus, it does not have to be learned.

While the negative one or also known as interference, is that which does not aid

the learning of TL as the NL structure or rule applied to TL does not actually

work and hence is considered as inappropriate. What is going to be investigated in

this research is the interference or the negative transfer of language that occurs in

junior high school setting.

Interference is defined by Dulay et al (as cited in Arifin, 2011) as an

instinctive transfer of the superficial structure of NL onto that of TL. Richard,

Platt, and Platt (as cited in Arifin, 2011) also have similar opinion that they define

interference as using the NL structure or rule which brings about error and

incorrect form of TL. Jendra (as cited in Arifin, 2011) further explains that

interference can occur in many areas of language knowledge such as phonology,

morphology, syntax, lexicon, and semantics. The focus of this study is to

investigate the grammatical interference that junior high school students

experience through Indonesia-English translations.

The Research Questions 1. 2.

The problems that will be investigated are formulated in the questions below:

a. What is the most frequent grammatical interference experienced by the

students?

(13)

The Research Objectives 1. 3.

The purpose of the research is to investigate the grammatical interference that is

experienced by junior high school students. Specifically, the research is aimed at

two objectives which are first, investigating what kind of grammatical interference

which is most frequently experienced by junior high school students, and second,

fathoming the difficulties that they face when learning English.

The Significance of the Research 1. 4.

As it has been elaborated in the introductory section, the research tries to discover

the grammatical interference that junior high school students face by translating

Bahasa Indonesia to English. It will provide both theoretical and practical benefits

as follow.

Theoretically, the research will give and enrich the literature of second

language acquisition particularly in discussion of grammatical interference that is

experienced by Indonesian students that can serve as reference and

recommendation for future research on the same field. Practically, it will also

provide a valuable information for English teachers to take the students‟ native

language transfer into account. It is helpful because if the transfer is facilitating,

then the teachers do not have to make it as priority. However, if grammatical

interference experienced by the students is severe and showing a tendency that it

may lead to their unsuccessful English mastery, then the teachers are supposed to

take further action to overcome it, otherwise it might become fossilized.

Scope of the Research 1. 5.

This study is concerned on investigating the interference experienced by the

(14)

many components such as phonology, syntax, and discourse, the writer tries to

limit the discussion problem on grammar only considering it will be a too

burdened to cover all those components.

The Research Methodology 1. 6.

This section will elaborate the methodology that will be used to collect and

analyze the data in the research.

1.6.1 Design of the Research

Since the research does not need to involve any experiment and give any

manipulation, the research then is designed as qualitative. The data collected will

be analyzed through error analysis

1.6.2 Participant

The research is done in a public junior high school in Bandung. The number of the

participants involved in the research is 36. The participants chosen are eighth

graders based on a consideration that they are still learning English which means

that they tend to be interfered by their native language.

1.6.3 The Data Collection Techniques

The data needed will be obtained through three techniques, first, having the

selected students translate a text from Bahasa Indonesia Indonesia to English in a

form of writing, observing their classroom, and second, conducting interview. The

text will specifically be designed by the researcher to see the interference

experienced by those students from junior high school and of course is adjusted to

their translating ability. The data will then be analyzed through Error Analysis

(15)

conducted to give supplementary data about their learning behavior. Meanwhile,

the interview is conducted to figure out the difficulties they encounter when

learning English.

1.6.4 Data Analysis

The data obtained are analyzed through Error Analysis which undergoes several

steps as follows:

1) Making Collection of error sample

In this step the necessary sample is collected to see the pattern of the error.

2) Identification of Error

This step decides whether the errors are really error or mistakes. If they are

mistakes, then they will be excluded from the analysis.

3) Description of Errors

In this step, errors are categorized whether they are phonological, morphological,

lexical, grammatical, or in discourse level. However, since the research only

concerns on grammatical interference, other kinds of interference are excluded.

4) Explanation of Errors

This step tries to explain the cause of the emergence of the error whether it is

interlingual or intralingual

(16)

This step delineates the error, for instance whether it is serious or not.

Clarification of Terms 1. 7.

Interlanguage

The range between native language to target language that second language

learners need to go through (Larsen et. al, 1992)

Interference

Negative language transfer that will hamper the acquisition of the target language,

occurs due to the existence of difference system between native and target

language (Muriel, &Troike, 2006).

Error

Occurs due to the limited knowledge of second language learners. They do not

know what is correct yet. (Corder, 1967, as cited in Murriel-trroike, 2006)

Mistake

Occurs due to the inability of second language learners in performing what they

already know. (Corder, 1967, as cited in Murriel-trroike, 2006)

Error Analysis

“Error Analysis (EA) is the first approach to the study of SLA which includes an internal focus on learners‟ creative ability to construct language” (Muriel, &Troike, 2006, pp. 37)

Target Language

The language the learners are trying to acquire.

Native Language

(17)

Organization of the Paper 1. 8.

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter will provide background of the research

including the problems or the research questions, aims

of the research, scope of the research, significance of

the research and also the brief description of the

methodology used in this research.

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter will discuss related theories, and related

studies that will support this research.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter comprises the research methodology, such

as research design, data collection, and data analysis.

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter provides the result of the research and

discussion of the research findings.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter presents the conclusion of the research and

also the implication of the research as well as the

(18)

Concluding Remark 1. 9.

This chapter has presented the background of the research, the research questions

and objectives, the significance and the scope of the research, the research

methodology, the clarification of terms and the paper organization. Review of

(19)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter will elaborate the procedures needed to be conducted to answer the

research questions. Specifically, there are five things will be discussed in this

chapter comprising the research methodology, the participants involved in the

research, data collection and data analysis. Each of them will be briefly discussed

below

3.1 The Research Method

In the purpose of answering the research questions, the research conducts

qualitative method. According to Cresswell (2009) Qualitative method has several

characteristics which are: it gathers the data in the field where the participants

experience issues, problems, and phenomena which are being the focus of the

study and do not take them to lab or doing any experiment, and the procedures to

collect the data can be documents analysis, behavior observation, and participants

interview.

3.2 The Research Site

3.2.1 Setting

The research takes place in one of public junior high school in Bandung, West

Java. The research then tries to discover the grammatical interference that is most

frequently experienced by the students and the difficulties they encounter when

doing Bahasa Indonesia-English translation.

3.2.2 Participant

There are 36 participants involved in the research. All of the participants are from

eight grade. The consideration of choosing eighth graders as the participants in the

research is that they are still learning English in the sense that they tend to be

(20)

3.3 Data Collection Techniques

The research employs three techniques in collecting the data. The three techniques

are collecting the students’ Indonesia-English translation and document analysis. Each of them will be explained below.

3.3.1 Students’ Translation Collection

The data that are analyzed come from the students’ translation from Indonesia to English. Ravem (1968) is known as one of the first researchers who used

translation as an instrument in SLA research (Larsen et. al. 1991). This translation

procedure is then elaborated more by Swain, Naiman, and Dumas (1974). They

further explain the procedure that the participants are given some sentences in

their NL and assigned to translate them to TL or vice versa. It is suggested that

this kind of procedure will require the students to use the same process as that

used in producing natural speech in TL (Larsen et. al. 1991). The research

implements similar thing but the sentences to be translated by the students are

given in the form of text. The difficulty of the text is of course adjusted to their

English ability so that they can translate it in an instance.

3.3.2 Classroom Observation

The second technique conducted in the research is classroom observation. The

conduction of this technique is to collect supplementary data concerning the

grammatical interference. The emergence of interference is believed to be

attributable to some factors. The research aims at discovering those factors in the

classroom through observation. The observation is conducted three times. Since

(21)

3.3.3 Interview

Interview is the last technique used to collect the data in the research. Interview is

conducted to specifically collect the data regarding the students’ difficulties in

learning English. Interview is used to obtain a well-defined finding that cannot be

observed through the collection of the students’ translation and classroom observation. It comprises four questions concerning the students’ method in

learning English, their opinion whether English and Bahasa Indonesia are the

same, their perception about the importance of English Acquisition, and the last is

about their difficulties as well as how they can cope with them.

3.4 Data Analysis

The data obtained are analyzed using Error Analysis. According to Lekova

(2010), error analysis is the primary approaches for studying and solving

interference that can be used in both spoken and written speech of L2 learners.

Meanwhile, according to Tarone (2006) error analysis is an approach that gathers

and analyzes the errors systematically both in the speech or writing of L2 learners.

Ellis (as cited in Saville and Troike, 2006) elaborates that error analysis

undergoes several steps to analyze the errors as following:

1) Making Collection of error sample

In this step the necessary sample is collected to see the pattern of errors. In

this research, the errors are taken from the students’ translations.

2) Identification of errors

After all the errors are taken, they are classified whether they are really error

or mistakes. If they are mistakes, then they are excluded from the analysis.

3) Description of Errors

In this step, errors are then further categorized whether they are phonological,

morphological, lexical, grammatical, or in discourse level. However, since

the research only concerns on grammatical interference, other kinds of

(22)

4) Explanation of Errors

This step tries to explain the cause of the emergence of the error whether it is

interlingual or intralingual. However, since the research aims to only see NL

influence, intralingual errors will not be discussed.

5) Evaluation of Errors

This step delineates the error, for instance whether it is serious or not.

3.5 Concluding Remark

This chapter has presented the methodology of the research which consists of the

design of the research, the research site, data collection techniques and data

analysis. The data obtained are analyzed and discussed which will be presented in

(23)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The findings of the research along with their discussion have been elaborated in

the former chapter. This chapter will provide the conclusion of the research as

well as the recommendation for both pedagogical implications and also further

research regarding interference in junior high school context.

5.1 Conclusions

The research aims at investigating the grammatical interference that might

interfere the students’ English learning. Specifically, there are two main things

that become the research’s objectives which are; uncovering the most grammatical

interference experienced by the students of junior high school as well as their

difficulties in learning English.

The research revealed three things which are first, the most grammatical

interference which is encountered by the students, second, the probable factor that

triggers its occurrence and third the students’ difficulties in learning English that

also play role in generating grammatical interference. Out of 36 students, there are

31 that make errors in the absence of morpheme “s” in the plural forms, making it as the most grammatical interference experienced by them. This error is

considered to stem from their native language interference since in Bahasa

Indonesia, such attachment of morpheme is not applied. To indicate a noun is in

plural form in Bahasa Indonesia, quantifiers are simply added before it, but they

do not interfere with the changing form of the noun by attaching morphemes

(Djenar, 2003). This error can be categorized as reduced system which is one of

interlanguage characteristics as the students make less complex grammatical

structure in the target language (Saville & Troike, 2006).

Saville & Troike further explain that such interlanguage characteristic is

(24)

language speech community thus the needs to communicate with correct

grammatical structures is not there as they can still sustain the communication

with the incorrect one. Such circumstance is observed in the classroom

observation that the students are not encouraged to speak English in the

classroom. The non-existence of the encouragement will generate no interaction,

that is the heart of communication and should be taught by the language teacher

(Brown, 2001). Interaction is believed to be an essential things in second

language acquisition as it enable the students to express meaning and build

discourse structures in the target language (Saville & Troike, 2006).

Regarding the students’ difficulties in learning English, they state that they

have difficulties in memorizing the verb changes in tenses, pronouncing words in

English, memorizing vocabularies and they also confess that they are mocked by

their peers when they try to speak English.

Their difficulties in memorizing the verb changes can actually be seen in

the research findings that there are 28 students who make errors concerning the

wrong use of tense. Although it is not the most error made, but its number is still

considerably high. Meanwhile, regarding their difficulties in pronouncing English

words and memorizing vocabularies, they cannot be observed during the research

owing to the less interaction in the classroom. Even though they are not observed,

they still serve as valuable supplementary information for language teacher to take

further action to overcome them. Their last difficulty is interesting. Being mocked

by their peers is a serious problem that should be overcome instantly since when

they are mocked, they will lose motivation to speak English. Motivation is a

fundamental thing that will determine the successfulness of second language

learners (Saville & Troike, 2006). This will as well lessens English interaction

between the students and in view of that, this problem should be handled seriously

(25)

5.2 Recommendations

Interlanguage is a common state that second language learners must go through.

However, it should always be supervised by the language teacher as it tends to be

fossilized. It is also advised to monitor the language transfer (both positive and

negative), to give information for the teacher to decide which grammatical

structure should be taught and which that has less priority. It is also suggested that

interactive classroom should be made by the teacher. It is important because less

interaction in English can give a rise to interference (Saville-Troike, 2006). For

that reason, the students should be encouraged to speak English by playing the

roles of interactive teacher proposed by Brown (2001), to give them a chance to

apply what they have learned about the target language since there is no guarantee

that they will get the same chance outside the classroom. Besides that, motivation

is an important thing that should be raised by the teacher. It is important because it

plays a role in determining whether the students are successful or not in acquiring

the target language (Saville-Troike, 2006). To do so, it is advised to apply some

characteristics of technique proposed by Brown (2001) that can intrinsically

motivate the students. The last recommendation is in regard with the students who

are being mocked by their peers when they speak English. The teacher should take

further action immediately to solve this problem otherwise English teaching and

learning in the school will not be effective as the students are not motivated and

willing to speak it.

Meanwhile, for future researcher, it is advised to conduct research on

other types of interference as it does not only occur in grammar, thus, it will

(26)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Amaral Luiz & Roeper, Luiz. (2014). Multiple Grammars and Second Language Representation. Second Language Research. Vol. 30(3). DOI: 10.1177/0267658313519017

Albirini, Abdulkafi, & Benmamoun, Elabbas. (2014). Aspects of second-language transfer in the oral production of Egyptian and Palestinian heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism. Vol. 18 (244). DOI: 10.1177/1367006912441729

Arifin, Win, Listyaningrum. (2011). Interference: its role in the target language mastery to indonesian learners. Register Journal. Vol. 4(1). Retrieved from: eprints.stainsalatiga.ac.id/79/

Boroditsky, Lera., Ham. Wendy., & Ramscar, Michael. (2002). What is universal in event perception? Comparing English and Indonesian speaker. Retrieved from: psych.stanford.edu/~michael/papers/2002_ramscar_universal.pdf

Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Longman

Creswell, W. J. (2009). (Revised Edittion). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches. USA: Sage

Djenar, Dwi, Noverini. (2003). A Students’ guide to Indonesian grammar. Oxford: Oxdord University Press.

Dominguez, Laura. (2009). Charting the route of bilingual development: Contributions from heritage speakers' early acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism. Vol. 12 (271). DOI: 10.1177/1367006909339812

Freeman, Larsen, Diane. & Long, H. Michael. (1991). An Introduction to second language acquisition research. New York: Longman

Grosjean, François. (2012). An attempt to isolate, and then differentiate, transfer and interference. International Journal of Bilingualism. Vol. 16(11). DOI: 10.1177/1367006911403210.

(27)

matter?. International Journal of Bilingualism. Vol. 17(505). DOI: 10.1177/1367006912439940

Hambali, Muslih. (2011). Investigating Grammatical Errors in Translation. Retrieved from: http://eprints.unsri.ac.id/id/eprint/314.

Ionin, Tania,. & Zubizarreta, María, Luisa. (2010). Introduction to the Special Issue: Selective first language influence and retreat from negative transfer. Second Language Research. Vol. 26(283). DOI: 10.1177/0267658310365767

Lee, Nancy., & Huang, Yuan, Yue. (2004). To be or not to be—the variable use of the verb be in the interlanguage of Hong Kong Chinese children. RELC. Vol. 35(2). pp. 211-228. Retrieved from: SAGE.com

Lekova, B. (2009). Language interference and methods of its overcoming in foreign language teaching. Trakia Journal of Sciences. Vol. 8(3). pp. 320-324. Retrieved from: http://www.uni-sz.bg

Maros, Marylina., Hua, Kim Tan., & Salehuddin, Khazriyati. (2007). Interference in learning English: grammatical errors in English essay writing among rural Malay secondary school students in Malaysia. E-Bangi Journal. Vol. 2(2). Retrieved from: eprints.ukm.my/114/1/Marlyna.pdf

Maurizio, Santoro. (2007). Second language Acquisition of Italian accusative and dative clitics. Second Language Research Journal. Vol. 23(1), pp. 37-50. Doi: 10.1177/0267658307071603

Montrul, Silvina. (2010). Dominant language transfer in adult second language learners and heritage speakers. Second Language Research. Vol. 26(293). DOI: 10.1177/0267658310365768

Mori-Mishima, Satomi. (2005). Autonomous and interdependent development of two language systems in Japanese/English simultaneous bilinguals: Evidence from question formation. Sage Publication. Vol 25(3). pp. 291–315. DOI: 10.1177/0142723705052560

(28)

Oh, Eunjeong. (2010). Recovery from first-language transfer: The second language acquisition of English double objects by Korean speakers. Second Language Research. Vol. 26(407). DOI: 10.1177/0267658310365786

Rankin, Tom. (2012). The transfer of V2: inversion and negation in German and Dutch learners of English. International Journal of Bilingualism. Vol.16 (139). DOI: 10.1177/1367006911405578

Sakel, Jeanette. (2012). Transfer and language contact: the case of Pirahã. International Journal of Bilingualism. Vol. 16(37). DOI: 10.1177/1367006911403212

Saville-Troike. (2006). Introducing to second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schulz, Barbara. (2011). Syntactic creativity in second language English: wh-scope marking in Japanese-English interlanguage. Second Language Research. Vol. 27(313). DOI: 10.1177/0267658310390503

Sharpe, Pamela. (1996). Barron’s practice exercises for TOEFL test. Jakarta Barat: Binarupa Aksara

Slabakova, Roumyana. (2003). Grammars Semantic evidence for functional categories in interlanguage. Second Language Research. Vol. 19(42). DOI: 10.1191/0267658303sr214oa.

Tarone, E. (2006). Interlanguage. pp. 1715-1719. Retrieved from: socling.genlingnw.ru/files/ya/interlanguage%20Tarone.PDF