CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
B. Some Pertinent Ideas
4. Grammatical Cohesion
Haliday and Hasan (1976) state that grammatical cohesion can be divided into reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction.
a. Reference
Haliday and Hasan (1976: 33) defined the reference is the specific nature of the information that is signaled for retrieval. Based on the place of reference, the interpretation of reference can be divided into endophora (textual) and exophoric (situational). Halliday and Hasan Both, (1976: 37) also say that anaphoric and cataphoric references use personal reference or pronominal reference, demonstrative reference and comparative reference.
16 1) Personal Reference
Personal reference is reference by means of function in the speech situation, through the category of person (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 37).
The items of reference are as follows:
Table.2.2. (Halliday, 1985: 295) Function
Determinative
Possessive
Class Pronoun Adjective
Singular
Masculin He/Him His His
Feminime She/her Hers Her
Neuter It (its) Its
Plural They/them Theirs Their
Source: Prayudha. 2012. http://gosrok.blogspot.com/2012/02/grammatical- cohesion.html.(10 February 2019).
It is references by means function of speech situation throught category of person: he, she, him, hers, they, them, theirs, his, it, its.
Example: She: There was a brief note from Sinta. She just said I‟m not going the hospital this weekend.
Its: “that‟s why its branches are called boughs!
2) Demonstrative Reference
17
According to Halliday and Hasan (1976: 37) state that demonstrative reference is reference by means of location, on a scale of proximity.
Table 2.3. (Haliday, 1985: 295)
Specific Near This/these This/these Here (now)
Remote That/those That/those There (then)
Non Specific it The
Source:Prayuda. 2012. http://gosrok.blogspot.com/2012/02/grammatical- cohesion.html (10 February 2019).
The circumstantial (adverbial) demonstratives here, there, now and then refer to the location of a process in space or time, and they normally do so directly, not via the location of some person or object that is participating in the process. The nominal demonstrative this, these, that, those and the refer to the location of something, typically some entity – person or object – that is participating in the process. They therefore occur as elements within the nominal group (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 57-58).
Example: The: Suddenly, the woman was laying there and calling for help.
These: I like the lions, and I like the polar bears. These are my favorites
3) Comparative Reference
18
Comparative reference is indirect reference by means of identity or similarity (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 37).The element of comparative that are compare of quantity and quality of the things. The comparison that express by certain class of adjectives and adverbs.
Example:that car more expensive than my car. The comparative reference in example that car and my car.
b. Substitution
According Haliday and Hasan (1976: 88) substitution is the replacement of one item by another. Additionally, Hatch in Widyaprasetio (2013: 21) explains that substitution refers to a specific entity but to a class of item.
Criterion is a grammatical function of the substitute item in English the substitute may function is a noun, a verb, or a clause.
Therefore, substitution is divided into three types: nominal, verbal, and clausal. Nominal substitution consist of one, and ones which function as head of a nominal group and can substitute only for an item which is itself head of a nominal group and same which substitutes for an entire nominal group. Verbal substitution consist of do (do, does, did, doing, done) which function as head of a verbal group and substitutes for a verb which is head of a verbal group.
Clausal substitution is a relation in which the entire clause not an element within the clause is presupposed and the contrasting element is outside the clause.
19 c. Ellipsis
Ellipsis is one of the part of sentence that cohesion. Halliday and Hasan (1976) point out that substitution and ellipsis are very similar to each other.
Moreover, Halliday and Hasan (1976: 88) assert that ellipsis is the omission of an item. There are three types of ellipsis; nominal" verbal" and clausal.
Nominal ellipsis is the ellipsis within the nominal group. Meanwhile, verbal ellipsis is the ellipsis of verbal group. It is divided into lexical and operator ellipsis.
Haliday and Hasan in Widyaprasetio (2013: 13) defined the Lexical ellipsis is the type of ellipsis in which the lexical verb is missing. Moreover, it is ellipsis 'from the right'. It always involves omission of the last word. On the other hand, operator ellipsis is ellipsis 'from the left'. It involves only the omission of the operator in which the lexical verb always remains intact.
Clausal ellipsis is the omission of a clause or an element of a clause.
d. Conjunction
Conjunction is a relationship that shows how sentences are relate to the next sentence. Haliday and Hasan (1976: 226) divided into four types of conjunction; Additive, Adversative, Causal, and Temporal.
1) Additive Conjunction
Additive conjunction contributes to give additional information without changing information in the previous phrase or clause. This is kind of the conjunction relation; and, further (more), moreover, besides that, by the way, or, nor, either.
20 2) Adversative Conjunction
The basic meaning of adversative conjunction is, contrary to expectation‟. The expectation may be derive from the content of what is being say, or from communication process. This is kind of the adversative conjunction; However, but, nevertheless, in fact, instead.
3) Causal Conjunction
Causal conjunction emphasize on “result, reason, and purpose” and the simple form of causal relation is express by so, thus, hence, therefore, consequently, accordingly, and number of expression such as a result (of that), inconsequence (of that), because of that. All these regularly take place in initial clause or sentence, and express causality.
4) Temporal Conjunction
Temporal conjunction is the relationship of time sequence within the sentences. The simplest of temporal conjunction type is then. Beside of then, there are many kind of sequential senses; next, afterwards, after that, soon, subsequently, and others.
21 C. Conceptual of Framework
The conceptual framework underlying in this research is given below:
Figure 2.1. Conceptual of Framework
Based on the conceptual framework above, it means that the researcher described target in process of writing narrative text. In writing narrative text, the researcher focuses on assessed the students‟ ability in write narrative text and analysis grammatical cohesion from the narrative text written by students using theory Haliday and Hasan in four types, there are: reference, substitution, ellipsis,
Writing
Narrative Text
Students‟ Ability
Reference Substitution Ellipsis Conjunction
Grammatical Cohesion By Haliday and Hasan Theory
22
and conjunction. The researcher described target in the process of an analysis the grammatical cohesion found in narrative text.
23 CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter deals with research design, variable and their operational definition, population and sample, instrument of the research, procedure of collecting data, and technique of data analysis.
A. Research Design
In this research, the researcher used descriptive quantitative as the research designed, specially belong to identified and discoursed analysis. This research belongs to descriptive research because it just collected and analyzed the data and after that conclusion based of the data. Then the researcher used the quantitative research because researcher wants to got accurate data. Additionally, this research is designed in descriptive quantitative research because the purpose of this research is to identify generic structure of narrative text and to identify the cohesive device used in narrative text written by the third semester of English Education Department of Unismuh Makassar. These descriptions are related to the objective of the study.
B. Research Variable and Indicator
Kerlinger (1973) explains the variable is behavior taken from different values.
Related on this statement, the variable is one of the researches. The variable of
24
this research are students‟ ability to written narrative text and grammatical cohesion found in narrative text.
C. Population and Sample 1. Population
Population of this research was the third semester students of English Department of Unismuh Makassar of academic year 2019/2020. It consists of 220 students from eight classes (source of English Department of Unismuh Makassar).
2. Sample
The sample of this research was selected by simple purposive sampling technique to identified students‟ ability to write narrative text and grammatical cohesion in narrative text written by the third semester at English Department of Unismuh Makassar. The researcher chose this technique because this research have specific criterion to got sample objectively. And the researcher took class BG3C as a sample observation with a total of 20 students because all of the students in English Department especially the third semester students have the same levels (low, middle, and high level) and previously researcher have conducted pre observation in the BG2C class.
D. Instrument of the Research
Instrument of this research is the researcher itself and used writing text.
Firstly, the researcher did observation to students understand about narrative text
25
with explained again the material of narrative text. Secondly, the researcher instructed students to made narrative text with the topic “My Embarrassing Moment” and written based on generic structure of narrative text. The third, the researcher collected data from students writing. And the fourth identified generic structure and classified words according to the theory and the fourth describes data.
E. Data Collection Method
The procedure of collecting data was chronologically perform as follow : 1. The researcher collected narrative text written by the third semester
students of English Department at Unismuh Makassar.
2. The researcher identified and classified the data systematically in accordance with the problem of the research.
F. Technique of Data Analysis
The data from narrative text written by the third semester of English Department at UNISMUH Makassar, the researcher analyzed the data as follows:
1. The researcher identified narrative text written by the third semester students of English Department at Unismuh Makassar.
2. The researcher identified the generic structure of the students‟ narrative writing.
3. Presented the data obtain from the data source.
26
4. The researcher classified and interpreted the data from the type grammatical cohesion with used the Haliday and Hasan theory.
5. The researcher counted the score students‟ ability, frequency and percentage of the each type of grammatical cohesion narrative text.
Table 3.1.Criteria identifying the data of students’ ability based on the general structure of narrative text.
a. Orientation
Criteria Score Specification
Complete to identify and set the scene and introduce the participant (it answer the questions: who, when, and where)
90-100 Very Good
Identify and set the scene and introduce the participant enough (it answer the question:
who, when, and where incomplete).
80-89 Good
Cannot incomplete to identify and set the scene and introduce the participant.
70-79 Fair
Not relevant to identify and set the scene and introduce the participant.
60-69 Poor
No answer of concept 50-59 Very Poor
b. Complication
Criteria Score Specification
Complete to identify and the crisis of problem arises. When the problem developed.
90-100 Very Good
27
Identify and the crisis of problem arises.When the problem developed enough.
80-89 Good
Cannot incomplete to identify and the crisis of problem arises.When the problem developed.
70-79 Fair
Not relevant to identify the crisis of problem arises. When the problem developed.
60-69 Poor
No answer of problem. 50-59 Very Poor
c. Resolution
Criteria Score Specification
Complete to find way or solution to solve problem.
90-100 Very Good To find a way or solution to solve the problem
is enough.
80-89 Good
Cannot incomplete to find a way or solution to solve the problem
70-79 Fair
Not relevant to find a way or solution to solve the problem
60-69 Poor
No answer of problem. 50-59 Very Poor
To calculate the mean score of the students‟ test result. The research used the following formula:
X = Where:
X = Mean Score
28 Σx = Sum of all score
N = Total number of sample
(Gay, et al, 2012)
Table 3.2. Classifying the data based the type grammatical cohesion
No Sentences
Grammatical Cohesion
Rf Sb E “C”
1 2 3 Total
Explanation:
Rf: Reference
Sb : Substitution
E : Ellipsis
“C” : Conjunction
To calculate the percentage of the students‟ grammatical cohesion found in narrative text. The researcher used formula:
P = Where :
29 P : Persentage
N : Types of grammatical cohesion T : Total Grammatical cohesion
(Tsareva, 2010)
Formula frequency of type grammatical cohesion : P = × 100%
Where :
P : Percentage of the frequency of each type of grammatical cohesion Fg : frequency of type grammatical cohesion
Tf : Total frequency of grammatical cohesion
30 CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consisted of the finding of the research and discussion that contains of data analysis in detail. The findings of the research covered the result of the data about students‟ ability in writing narrative text and grammatical cohesion in narrative text.
A. FINDINGS
The findings of the research deal with answer of the problem statement which was to identify students‟ ability to write narrative text and to identify the types of grammatical cohesion found in narrative text written by the third semester student of English Department at Unismuh Makassar. The grammatical cohesion by Haliday and Hasan theory classified into four types: reference, substitution, ellipsis, and resolution.
1. Students’ ability to write narrative text based on analyzing the generic structure of narrative text.
The students‟ ability was the ability to write the main of their narrative paragraph as relevantly, clearly, originality, logically, etc. Measuring of the
31
students‟ ability was based on classification the generic structure and mean score. The mean score of the students‟ in writing narrative text is found by counting the student‟ score classification in term of orientation, complication, and resolution. The success of students‟ ability was proved by the score classification and the mean score of content below:
Table 4.1. Students’ score Classification in term of Orientation Organization Criteria
Score
Total Students
Specification
Orientation
90 - 100 15 Very Good
80 - 89 2 Good
70 – 79 3 Fair
60 - 65 0 Poor
50 - 56 0 Very Poor
Based on the table 4.1 above the score classification orientation students‟ ability in writing narrative text. From the 20 students‟, the researcher found 15 students got score (90-100), 2 students got score (80-89), and 3 students got score (70-79). and no student got score (60-65) and (50-56).
Table 4.2. Students’ Score Classification in term of Complication Organization Criteria Score Total
Students
Specification
Complication
90 – 100 15 Very Good
80 – 89 5 Good
32
70 – 79 0 Fair
60 – 69 0 Poor
50 - 59 0 Very Poor
Based on the table 4.2 above the score classification complication students‟ ability in writing narrative text. From the 20 students, the researcher found 15 students got score (90-100), 5 students got score (80-89), and no student got score (70-79), (60-69), and (50-59).
Table 4.3. Students’ Score Classification in term of Resolution Organization Criteria
Score
Total Students
Specification
Resolution
90 - 100 12 Very Good
80 - 89 6 Good
70 – 79 2 Fair
60 - 65 0 Poor
50 - 56 0 Very Poor
Based on the table 4.3 above the score classification resolution students‟ ability in writing narrative text. From the 20 students, the researcher found 12 students got score (90-100), 6 students got score (80-89), 2 students got score (70-79), and no student got score (60-65) and (50-59).
Table 4.4. Mean Score Organization
33
Organization Ʃx N Mean (X)
Orientation 1860 20 93
Complication 1896 20 94.8
Resolution 1793 20 89.55
Based on the table 4.4 above from the 20 students that made a narrative text, the researcher found the mean score from the criteria score classification of organization generic structure in narrative text. The mean score of orientation was 93, complication was 94.8, and resolution was 89.55.
2. Types of Grammatical Cohesion found in narrative text.
The next step counted the frequency all types and percentages the data contain grammatical cohesion found in narrative text written by the third semester students of English Department at Unismuh Makassar. The types of grammatical cohesion are reference (Rf), substitution (Sb), Ellipsis (E), and conjunction (C).
Table. 4.5. The Frequency of All Types of Grammatical Cohesion and the Percentages
NO
Types of Grammatical Cohesion
Frequency Percentages
1 Reference (Rf) 557 69.02 %
2 Substitution (Sb) 28 3.5 %
34
3 Ellipsis (E) 1 0.12 %
4 Conjunction (C) 221 27.4 %
Total 807 100 %
Based on the table 4.5. above, reference used 557 times, substitution used 28 times, ellipsis used 1 times, and conjunction used 221 times. Then, the percentages of each types of grammatical cohesion found a reference was 69.02 %, substitution was 3.5 %, ellipsis was 1 %, and conjunction was 27.4 %. Grammatical cohesion that most used by the students is reference, the second is conjunction, the third is substitution, and the last is ellipsis.
B. DISCUSSION
After analyzed the data, the writer would like to discuss the result of the findings of the research.
1. Students’ ability in writing narrative text based on analyzing the generic structure of narrative text.
Narrative text there was the generic structure that contains such as orientation, complication, and resolution. Orientation was the introduction of the story in which the character, setting and time of the story are established.
Complication was explored the conflict in the story. Then resolution, was situation which the problem has been resolved. In every generic structure the writer identified the content of students‟ narrative text.
35
The researcher found the data students‟ ability in writing narrative text at the third semester students of English Department at Unismuh Makassar with the classified the criteria score of generic structure and counted of mean score. And the result of students score classification the generic structure of narrative text from 20 students, the organization of orientation there were 15 students got score (90-100) in very good specification, there were 2 students got score (80-89) in good specification, there are 3 students got score (70-79) in fair specification, and there was no student got poor and very poor specification.
The organization of complication there were 15 students got score (90- 100) in very good specification, there were 5 students got score (80-89) in good specification, and there was no student got fair, poor, and very poor specification.
The organization of resolution there were 12 students got score (90- 100) in very good specification, there were 6 students got score (80-89) in good specification, there were 2 students got score (70-79) in fair specification and there was no student got poor and very poor specification.
And the mean score from 20 students of orientation was 93, mean score of complication was 94.8, and mean score of resolution was 89.65.
2. The Frequency of All Types of Grammatical Cohesion found in narrative text and the Percentages.
36
Classified the frequency and counted percentages the types of grammatical cohesion by Haliday and Hasan theory found in narrative text written by students‟.
Haliday and Hasan (1976: 28) had distributed grammatical cohesion into reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction. The researcher found 20 narrative text written by the third semester students of English Department at Unismuh Makassar. After analyzed the text, references is the mostly used in the narrative text with 557 times of used with the percentages was 69.02 %. The reference used is personal reference, such as I, we, me, and she. And demonstrative reference, such as this, that, these, and the. Azzouz (2009: 50) argues that such phenomena can be caused by the students‟ mastery of grammatical devices and their knowledge regarding such devices.
Conjunction is the second with 221 times of used with the percentages 27.4 %. Students‟ previous knowledge may help them to use kinds of conjunction. The conjunction used additive conjunction and, or, adversative conjunction but, however, causal conjunction because, and temporal conjunction after that. Substitution is the third that most used by students with 28 times of used with percentages was 3,5 %. The example substitution used by students is one, do, and did. Azzouz (2009: 51) argued that students‟ awareness regarding items to be substituted or omitted may affect the use of it. Ellipsis is the fourth that most used by students with 1 times of used with the percentages was 0,12 %. The example of ellipsis used by students is most of them.
According to the results, students are not familiar with the use of Ellipsis