CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE
F. Data Analysis
After writing essay test was conducted, the data were analyzing. There were four steps in analyzing the data:
1. Coding
Coding means to change the information into symbols either in letter or in number. It was necessary to organize the data and to make them easier to be analyze. Here, the researcher transcribed students’ essay and compare them with common linking words (modified from Biber, 2002;
Blakey, 1997; Azar, 2006; Beaumont and Granger, 1989; Onwuegbuzie and Frels, 2016; Swales and Feak, 1994; Oshima and Hogue, 2006).
2. Organizing
After the data were coded, they must be organizing. The data, which were not organize properly, would be difficult to be read and understand. The researcher identified students’ errors in using linking words and the most dominant kinds of linking words that used by the students, then grouped them into separate divisions.
3. Counting
After the students’ data had been grouped into separate division, the researcher employed the percentage the data to find out the most dominant kinds of linking words and the most dominant errors that used and made by the students. The researcher employed the percentage descriptive analysis to count all errors by using a simple formula as follows:
𝑃𝐼 =𝐹𝐼
𝑁 × 100%
Where PI : the proportion of frequency of occurrence of errors FI : the absolute frequency of types of errors
N : the total number of possible errors 𝑃𝐼 =𝐹𝐼
𝑁 × 100%
Where PI : the proportion of frequency of occurrence of LWs used FI : the absolute frequency of types of errors LWs used N : the total number of possible LWs used
4. Tabulation
It was an activity of summarizing all data which put into a table. It could be done only when the coding, the organizing, and the counting of the data were finished. Sometimes the counting of the data could be done at the same time with tabulation. The data that have been analyzed would gave us an abstract description about the matter we wish to know. The result of the data analysis would answer the problems of the study as stated in Chapter I.
A. Findings
The findings are presented the errors in the use of linking word and the most dominant kinds of linking words of the fifth semester students of Muhammadiyah University of Makassar in their descriptive essay. There were total 43 sample of essays that the researcher got from the students. The researcher identified all the errors that found in students’ essay by using the Surface Strategy Taxonomy. While to identify the kinds of linking words, researcher compared with common linking words modified by the experts.
In analyzing the errors in the using linking words and the most dominant kinds of linking words in the students’ essay, the researcher applied the procedure.
1. Dominant Type of Errors
In this case, there were four types of error which are omission, addition, misinformation and misordering. Then addition divided into three types which are double marking, regularizations and simple addition but only the last type that appear in students’ essay. The frequency and percentage of each types of error were as follows:
NO. Types of Errors Number of Errors
Percentage
%
1 Omission (O) 4 12.50%
2 Addition (A) 11 34.38%
3 Misinformation (Mi) 13 40.63%
4 Misordering (Mo) 4 12.50%
Total 32 100%
As seen in text above, there are 32 errors in the use of linking words in 43 essays that could be found by the researcher from the fifth semester students of English major of Muhammadiyah University of Makassar. However, the researcher also found many errors in essay.
From the result of counting, misinformation errors became the most dominant type of errors with 13 times (40.63%). The second dominant error was addition errors with 11 times (34.38%). Then the last was omission and misordering errors with 4 times (12.50%) each.
O 13%
A Mi 34%
41%
Mo 12%
PERCENTAGE (%)
Table 2. The Frequency and Percentage of Errors
Figure 2. The Distribution of Errors Percentage
a. Omission
The researcher found 4 errors in the students’ essay or 12.50% in this type of errors.
b. Addition
The researcher found 11 errors in the students’ essay or 34.38%
in this type of errors. It became second frequent type of error in this research.
c. Misinformation
The researcher found 13 errors in the students’ essay or 40.63%
in this type of errors. It also became the most frequent type of error in this research and make it the most dominant error of using linking words made by student.
4
11
13
4
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Omission (O) Addition (A) Misinformation (Mi) Misordering (Mo)
Types of Errors
Figure 3. The Distribution of Errors
d. Misordering
The researcher found 4 errors in the students’ essay or 12.50% in this type of errors. It became third or the last frequent type of error in this research along with omission error.
2. Dominant Kind of Linking Words
In the other side, there were ten kinds of linking words that the researcher decided from the several expert opinions (Biber, 2002;
Blakey, 1997; Azar, 2006; Beaumont and Granger, 1989; Onwuegbuzie and Frels, 2016; Swales and Feak, 1994; Oshima and Hogue, 2006), which are enumeration, addition, summation (summary), apposition (example), result/inference, time, place, contrast, concession, and transition. The frequency and percentage of each types of linking words were as follows:
NO. Types of Linking Words
Number of
Uses Percentage %
1 Enumeration
First 2 0.47%
Second 1 0.23%
Next 3 0.70%
Then 4 0.94%
Last 1 0.23%
Finally 2 0.47%
Total 13 3.05%
2 Addition
In addition 2 0.47%
Similarly 1 0.23%
and 221 51.88%
also 36 8.45%
Furthermore 5 1.17%
Moreover 5 1.17%
Total 270 63.38%
3 Summation
Total 0 0%
4 Apposition
For Example 1 0.23%
Namely 1 0.23%
Or 22 5.16%
Total 24 5.63%
5 Result
Because 17 3.99%
So 5 1.17%
Therefore 1 0.23%
Total 23 5.40%
6 Time
Until now 2 0.47%
While 4 0.99%
Before 2 0.47%
Since 2 0.47%
Until 2 0.47%
Total 12 2.82%
7 Place
Above 2 0.47%
In front 2 0.47%
Wherever 1 0.23%
Total 5 1.17%
8 Contrast
On the other side 1 0.23%
However 3 0.70%
Both…and… 11 2.58%
But 36 8.45%
Total 51 11.97%
9 Concession
Although 3 0.70%
Besides 2 0.47%
Still 12 2.82%
Total 17 3.99%
10 Transition
Meanwhile 1 0.23%
Now 10 2.35%
Total 11 2.58%
TOTAL 426
As seen in table above, there were 426 linking words that appear in 43 essays that could be found by the researcher from the fifth semester students of English major of Muhammadiyah University of
Enumeration Addition summation Apposition Result Time Place Contrast Concession Transition
Figure 4. The Distribution of Linking Words Percentage Table 3. The Frequency and Percentage of Linking Words Uses
Makassar. However, from the result addition became the most dominant type of linking words with 270 times (63.38%). The second dominant type was contrast with 51 times (11.97%). Then the third dominant type was apposition with 24 times (5.63%). The forth dominant type was result with 23 times (5.40%). The fifth dominant type was concession with 17 times (3.99%). The sixth dominant type was enumeration with 13 times (3.05%). The seventh dominant type was time with 12 times (2.82%). Then the next type was transition with 11 times (2.58%). Then the next before the last dominant type was place with 5 times (1.17%). And the last was summation with there was not appear at all in students’ essay (0%).
a. Enumeration
The researcher found 13 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 3.05%.
13
270 0
24 23 12 5
51 17 11
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Enumeration Addition summation Apposition Result Time Place Contrast Concession Transition
Types of Linking Words
Figure 5. The Distribution of Linking Words Uses
b. Addition
The researcher found 270 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 63.38%. It also became the most frequent type of linking words in this research and make it the most dominant kind of linking words made by student.
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5
First Second Next Then Last Finally
Enumeration
0 50 100 150 200 250
In addition Similarly and also Furthermore Moreover
Addition
Figure 6. The Distribution of Enumeration
Figure 7. The Distribution of Addition
c. Summation (Summary)
The researcher did not find this type of linking words appear in the students’ essay or 0%. It became last frequent type of linking words in this research.
d. Apposition (Example)
The researcher found 24 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 5.63%. It became third frequent type of linking words in this research.
e. Result/inference
The researcher found 23 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 5.40%.
0 5 10 15 20 25
For Example Namely Or
Apposition
Figure 8. The Distribution of Apposition
f. Time
The researcher found 12 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 2.82%.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Because So Therefore
Result
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5
Until now While Before Since Until
Time
Figure 9. The Distribution of Result
Figure 10. The Distribution of Time
g. Place
The researcher found 5 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 1.17%.
h. Contrast
The researcher found 51 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 11.97%. It became second frequent type of linking words in this research.
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5
Above In front Wherever
Place
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
On the other side However Both…and…
But
Contrast
Figure 11. The Distribution of Place
Figure 12. The Distribution of Contrast
i. Concession
The researcher found 17 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 3.99%.
j. Transition
The researcher found 11 times this type of linking words that appear in the students’ essay or 2.58%.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Although Besides Still
Concession
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Meanwhile Now
Transition
Figure 13. The Distribution of Concession
Figure 14. The Distribution of Transition
B. Discussion
Discussions are presented as the way to discover the ideas related to the findings, previous study and correlated theories. The finding shown that the fifth semester students of English major of Muhammadiyah University of Makassar used linking words in their essay. This indicate what has been observed in previous studies that “ideas are overtly linked throughout the essay. Use cohesive device (such a logical connectors) is always accurate. Compound and complex sentences are used accurately to create clear connections across sentences and paragraphs” (Gennaro, 2016:
13).
From the findings, it was known there were 426 times linking words that appear in the students’ essay. Addition became the most dominant type of linking words that used by the students with 270 times.
“And” became the most frequent linking words that appear in addition types.
This is another indication of what has been observed in previous study that
“the appropriate use of particular linking words depends on the organization of the essay” (Apse and Farneste, 2018).
From the findings, it was also known that there were nine types of linking words that appear in students’ essay from ten types. The only type of linking words that did not appear was summation (summary). This is another indication of what has been observed in previous study that
”considering the linking words and phrases these authors recommend to be used in each type of essays and organizational patterns, it can be observed
that the same groups of linking adverbials are common for several essay types and organizational patterns, for example, to illustrate, to persuade and to argue, enumeration linking adverbials are used, and all essays are recommended to be finished with the summation linking words and phrases”
(Apse and Farneste, 2018). It is allowing us to assume why the summation (summary) types did not appear in students’ essay. Students’ essay was a descriptive essay and as we know descriptive essay did not use to persuade (persuasive essay) or to argue (argumentative essay), it is just to describe a thing.
Even the total numbers of linking words uses were 426 times, the kind of words that appear only 35 types of word from total 120 types of word that found by the researcher. Which means that the students only use several linking words that they have known and compatible with the kind of essay. This indicate what has been observed in previous studies that “at a proficient user’s level, linking words and phrases are not among very frequently used discourse markers to keep the written text coherent and unified” (Apse and Farneste, 2018).
On the other side, the finding also shown that the fifth semester students of English major of Muhammadiyah University of Makassar made errors in their essay. Learners’ errors need to be analysed because they provide significant information to the researcher about the language acquisition process, to the teacher – ‘how far towards the goal the learner has progressed’, and the learner can also learn from them (Corder, 1967:
161). The explanation from Corder are related to the significance of this research.
From the findings, it was known there were 32 errors that made by the students in their essay. Misinformation error became the most dominant types of error with 13 errors. All of the observed errors may be classified as intralingual errors base on the source of the error, which coincides with conclusion that more advanced learners mainly demonstrate intralingual errors (Apse and Farneste, 2018). It also related to Heydari and Bagheri (2012: 1588) as learners’ progress in acquiring the norms of the target language, more and more intralingual errors are manifested.
The findings shown that only 32 errors that found in the students’
essay from total 457 linking words that appear (426 was correct uses). That was a small number of errors which related to Ngadda and Nwoke (2014:
13) their research indicates that errors in the use of connectives appear to be the least frequent ones. Which mean that beside this research only focus on the errors in the using of linking words, it also because error in use of connectives, like linking words, is one of infrequent one.
As seen also in the findings, there are four types of error that occur in the students’ essay and the sources of those errors was intralanguage errors, which means that the sources of errors came from target language itself, in this case English. It was because all types of error that occur in the students’ essay were in the English essay form and English was the target language from the students where Indonesian was the source language of
them. It supported the statement form Apse and Farneste (2018) that the main type of errors found in the essay is intralingual errors. The intralanguage errors are caused by overgeneralization, ignorance of rule restriction, incomplete application of rules, and false concept hypothesized.
Because the research was only focused on error in using linking words, so there are only three possible cause that became the cause of the errors besides false concept hypothesized.
From all discussion above, it can be summarized that the fifth semester students of English major of Muhammadiyah University of Makassar who learn English as foreign language tend to use linking words in their essay specially addition, contrast and apposition type which consist the basic linking words (and, or, but). However, the most dominant still addition types. It allows us to assume that the result of this research correlate with the research observations mentioned in Apse and Farneste (2018) the main findings of the research indicate that proficient users of a language tend to use linking words and phrase appropriately.
The students also tend to make some errors, especially misinformation errors that become the most frequent error that found by the researcher. It allows us to assume that the result of this research correlate with the research observations mentioned in Apse and Farneste (2018) the students demonstrate good knowledge and skills of the use of appropriate linking words and phrases in illustration essays as there are rather few errors observed. And also related to another Apse and Farneste (2018) knowledge
and skills of how to use LWPs properly do not result in the overall correctness of a written text and the students’ ability to express themselves comprehensively and without errors.
A. Conclusion
After conducting the research, doing the analysis and presenting the result, the researcher could draw some conclusions. The conclusions of this study presented as follows:
1. Based on the finding of the analysis, it can be seen that the students’ used total 457 linking words, 426 correct uses and 32 errors. The findings shown total 426 linking words that found by the researcher which consist of 13 enumerations (3.05%), 270 additions (63.38%), 0 summations (0%), 24 appositions (5.63%), 23 results (5.40%), 12 times (2.82%), 5 place (1,17%), 51 contrasts (11.97%), 17 concessions (3.99%) and 11 transitions (2.58%). Addition became the most dominant kind of linking words that found by the researcher with the word “and” became the most frequent linking words. While summation is the most infrequent kind of linking words of all.
2. Based on the errors that occur in the students’ essay, source of those error was intralanguge errors. The findings shown total 32 errors appear in the students’ essay which is consist of 4 omission errors (12.50%), 11 addition errors (34.38%), 13 misinformation errors (40.63%) and 4 misordering errors (12.50%). Misinformation errors was the most dominant kind of
errors that found by the researcher, while omission and misordering were the most infrequent kind of error of all.
B. Suggestion
The researcher would like to propose some suggestions. It is expected that the result of this research will hopefully give a new idea for a better teaching and learning process especially in teaching writing in the English major of Muhammadiyah University of Makassar.
1. For lecturers
The researcher suggested the lecturers of English major to pay more attention of their students’ ability in using linking words especially the errors in using it. The lecturers can use interesting technique in teaching process to increase students’ ability and decrease students’ errors. This research can be used as a reference to developing a new teaching method which can be applied in a lesson plan.
2. For students
As the students, make errors in the writing essay is normal, include error in the use of linking words, they have to learn more about the function of the linking words and how to use them. This research can be used as learning materials for self-teaching.
3. For the next researchers
The researcher expected that the result of this study can give an informative input to the next researchers who probably conduct similar research variable.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, B. and Beveridge, A. 2007. A guide to assessment and skill in SCAA.
Australia, Perth: Edith Cowan University.
Apse, V. and Farneste, M. 2018. Error Analysis of the Use of Linking Words and Phrases in Tertiary Level Essays. Baltic Journal of English Language, Literature and Culture Vol. 8, 2018: 26-39.
Apse, V. and Farneste, M. 2018. Improving the Use of Linking words in Tertiary Level Essays. Journal of Rural Environment, Education, Personality Vol.
11. ISSN 2255-808X
Arikunto, S. 2002. Prosedur Penelitian. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Azar, B. S. 2006. The Longman Understanding and Using English Grammar, 3rd ed. NY: Longman
Baxronovish, P. A. 2016. Linking Words as a Linguistic Object. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature Vol. 4, Issue 7, July 2016.
Beaumont, D. and Granger, C. 1989. The Heinemann English Grammar. Oxford:
Heinemann.
Biber, D., Concard, S. and Leech, G. 2002. The Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.
Blakey, T. N. 1997. English for Maritime Studies. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Brown, H. D. 2004. The Grammar of English. India, New Delhi: Goodwill Publishing House.
Cox, C. 2007. Teaching language arts: A student centered classroom 6th edition.
Massachussetts, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Dulay, H. 1982. Language Two. New York: Oxford University.
Ellis, R.1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E. and Airasian, P. W. 2012. Educational Research.
Competencies for Analysis and Applications, 10th ed. NY: Pearson Education, Inc.
Harmer, J. 2004. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman Group Limited.
Johansson, D. and Roger T. 1975. Learning Together Alone, Coorperation, Competition, and Individualization. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Inc.
Nunan, D. 1992. Research Methods in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. 2016. The Missing Link: The Use of Ling Words and Phrases as a Link to Manuscript Quality. Journal of Educational Issues Vol. 2, December 2016
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. and Frels, R. K. 2016. Seven steps to a comprehensive literature review: A multimodal and cultural approach. London, England: Sge.
Oshima, A. and Hogue, A. 1997. Introduction to Academic Writing 2th ed. USA:
Longman.
Oshima, A. and Hogue, A. 2006. Writing Academic English, Level 4, 4th ed. The Longman Academic Writing Series. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education, Inc.
Plancic, B. and Nincevic, S. 2014. Transition Words in Academic Writing.
Transactions on Maritime Science. Split: TOMS.
Richard, J. C. 1974. Error Analysis. England: Longman Group Ltd.
Saleh, M. 2001. Pengantar Praktik Penelitian Pengajaran Bahasa. Semarang: IKIP Semarang Press.
Schwerin, C. 2007. Essay Writing: Defveloping Academic Writing Skills in English.
Journal of English Language. Education.
Starkey, L. 2014. How to Write Great Essay 1st ed. New York, NY: Learning Express
Sugiyono. 2013. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta Bandung
Swales, J. M. and Feak, C. B. 1994. Academic Writing for Graduate Students. A Course for Nonnative Speakers of English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Swarbic, A. 1994. Teaching Modern Language. London: Longman.