Mapping grammatical errors in speech production of junior and senior students: A case study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25170/ijelt.v8i1.1531Keywords:
language acquisition, communicative approach, Competency-based language teaching, grammatical errorsAbstract
Acquiring a foreign language requires a student to master the two elements of language, vocabulary and grammar, and the four language skills, listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Within each skill, these two language elements play a considerably essential role since they are seen as the very core aspects of language learning and that they are regarded inherent in each of these skills. Thus, vocabulary and grammatical aspects cannot be separated from the four language skills in language acquisition as without any one of which each skill is never acquired.
Since the implementation of communicative approach in 1984 to the application of the competency-based language teaching in Indonesia, English programs at high schools have been meaning or message based rather than language usage or form oriented. As a result, grammar learning has been significantly kept aside if not totally ignored in class interactions, and that communication success becomes the main target in instructional objectives. This study attempts to map grammatical errors the students make in their speech productions. It employs an interview technique for data collection by recording the conversations of twenty respondents - - junior and senior students - - on a selected issue of a particular topic and transcribing them in the form of written transcripts which are then to be analyzed from a grammatical perspective with the reference of grammar books. Those violating the grammatical norms will be considered as grammatical errors. It has been found out that learners’ grammatical errors are derived from two major causes - - translating concepts of L1 into L2 and their approximative system. This study concludes that the communicative classrooms which utilize the competency-based language teaching bring about a positive impact upon grammar learning. This research is significant as it gives a great contribution to structure and speaking class teachers, students, as well as to the department for policy making.
References
Alexander, L.G. (1978). Mainline beginners. London: Longman.
Beretta, A. (1989). Attention to form or meaning? Error treatment in the Bangalore project. TESOL Quarterly 23, 283-303.
Breen, M. P. (1984). Process syllabus for the language classroom. In C.J. Brumfit. (Ed.), General English Syllabus design : Curriculum and syllabus design for the general English classroom. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Breen, M. P. & C.N. Candlin. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics. (1),2.
Candlin, C. N. 1984. Syllabus design as a critical process. In C.J. Brumfit. (Ed.), General English syllabus design : Curriculum and syllabus design for the general English classroom. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Ellis, R. (1984). Can syntax be taught? A study of the effects of formal instruction on the acquisition of wh-questions by children. Applied Linguistics 5, 138-55.
Ellis, R. (1992). On the relationship between formal practice and second language acquisition. Die Neuren Sprachen 91, 131-47.
Ellis, R. (1997). SLA research and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eubank, L. (1987). The acquisition of German negation by formal language learners. In B. Van Patten, T. Dvorak, & J. Lee (Eds.), Foreign Language Learning: A Research Perspective. Rowely, Mass: Newbury House.
Dardjowidjojo, S. (1993). Some controversial issues in the communicative approach presented in the 41st TEFLIN Seminar. Padang: IKIP Padang.
Dardjowidjojo, S. (1997). English policies and their classroom impact in some ASEA/Asian countries In G. Jacobs (Ed.), Language classroom of tomorrow: Issues and responses. Singapore: RELC.
Dardjowidjojo, S. (2000). English teaching in Indonesia. English Australian Journal 18, 22-29.
Day, E. & S. Shapson. (1991). Integrating formal and functional approaches to language teaching in French immersion: an experimental study. Language Learning 41, 25-8.
Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. 1988. Bahasa Inggris untuk SMA. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka.
Dulay, H. & M. Burt. (1973). Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning 23, 245-58.
Hargreaves, R. & M. Fletcher. (1978). Making polite noises. Surrex: Nelson.
Harley, B. (1989). Functional grammar in French immersion: Classroom experiment. Applied Linguistics 10, 331-59.
Hatch, E. (1978). Discourse analysis and second language acquisition in E. Hatch (Ed.). 1978. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Hover, D. (1988). Think twice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, K. & K. Morrow. 1981. Communication in the classroom. Essex: Longman.
Kaida, K. (1987). The effect of formal instruction on monitored and spontaneous naturalistic interlanguage performance. TESOL Quarterly 22, 509-15.
Kismadi, G. C., S. Soeryah, A. Moertoyo, Senduk, Anekke, A. Sulaeman. (1982). Communicating in English: Books 1-6. Jakarta: Indira.
Kismadi, G. (1991). Basic 1-4. Jakarta: Yayasan LIA.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis. London: Longman.
Lightbrown. P. (1983). Exploring relationships between developmental and instructional sequences in L2 acquisition. In H. Selinger & M. Long (Eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Lyster, R. (1994). The effect of functional-analytic teaching on aspects of French immersion students’ sociolinguistic competence’. Applied Linguistics 15, 263-87.
Makino, T. 1980. Acquisition order of English morphemes by Japanese secondary school students. Journal of Hokkaido University Education 30, 101-48.
Marcellino, M. (2001). "Effects of communicative classrooms in grammar learning: Another Look". Presented in the 36th RELC International Seminar, Singapore, April 22 - 25, 2001.
Meisel, J. (1983). Strategies of second language acquisition: More than one kind of simplification. In R. Andersen (Ed.), Pidginization and creolization as language acquisition. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Nababan, P. W. J. (1982). Indonesia: The language situation: In R.B. Noss (Ed.). Language Teaching Issues in Multilingual Environments in Southeast Asia. Singapore: RELC.
Nababan, P.W.J. 1988. English language teaching profile (unpublished paper).
Pica, T. 1983. Adult acquisition of English as a second language under different conditions of exposure. Language Learning 33, 465-497.
Pienemann, M. (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 6, 186-214.
Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Purwo, B. K. (1990). Pragmatik dan pengajaran bahasa: Menyibak Kurikulum (1984). Yogyakarta: Kanisius.
Reiss, M. 1985. The good language learner: another look. Canadian Modern Language Review 41, 511-23.
Schumann, J. (1978). The pidginization process: A model for second Language Acquisition. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Sharwood Smith, M. (1986). Comprehension versus acquisition: two ways of processing input. Applied Linguistics 7, 239-56.
Spada, N. & P. Lightbrown. (1993). Instruction and the development of questions in L2 classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15, 205-24.
Stern, H. H. (1984). Review and discussion. In C.J. Brumfit. (Ed.), General English syllabus design: Curriculum and syllabus design for the general English classroom. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Stevick, E. (1980). Teaching languages: A way and ways. Rowely, Mass: Newbury House.
Sumardi, Muljanto. (1993). How communicative is our communicative approach? Presented in the 41st TEFLIN Seminar. Padang: IKIP Padang.
Van Patten, B. (1990). The acquisition of clitic pronouns in Spanish: Two case studies. In B. Van Patten & J. Lee (eds.). 1990. Second language acquisition foreign language learning. Clevedon, North Somerset: Multilingual Matters.
Weinert, R. (1987). Process in classroom second language development: the acquisition of negation in German. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Second language acquisition in context. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentince-Hall.
White, L. (1991). The verb-movement parameter in second language acquisition: some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research 7, 133-61.
Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. 1984. Educational and pedagogic factors in syllabus Design. In C.J. Brumfit. (Ed.). General English syllabus design: curriculum and syllabus design for the general English classroom. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Wilkins, D. A. (1972). An investigation into the linguistic and situational content of the common core in a unit/credit system. Strassbourg: Council of Europe, Committee for Out-of-School Education and Cultural Development.
