An Analysis of Grammatical Errors in EFL College Students​‟

Proposal Thesis Writing

Baiselyn M. Utto

Abstract: ​The study is aimed at describing the dominant grammatical errors made by
English Education students at STKIP YDB in writing their thesis proposal. The
objectives of the study were formulated as (1) to find out the most common grammatical
errors made by the students in writing their thesis proposal and (2) to find out the source
of the grammatical errors made by the students in writing thesis proposal. The method of
the study was qualitative descriptive. Documentation was used as instrument of the study
from
which data was collected through 15 thesis proposals of fourth semester English
education students in the academic year from August 2016 to February 2017 year.
Technique of data analysis that was used as proposed by Ellis (1996) is through
collecting samples, identification of errors, classification of errors,
explanation of error and evaluation of the errors. The classification of the grammatical
errors are based on Linguistic and Surface Taxonomy category , while source of the
errors are based on theories of interlingual and intralingual transfer errors. The research
findings reveal that the most common errors made by the students in linguistic taxonomy
fall into the error use of passive voice, subject-verb agreement, tense verb, part of speech
which are comprised 79.38 % of total grammatical error, while in the surface taxonomy
falls into the omission and misordering errors which are comprised 71.73 % of total
errors. Dealing with the source of the errors, it was found that intralingual transfer such
as overgeneralization and incomplete application of rules which comprise 65,64 % of
total of errors, are the major source of grammatical errors that the students made in
writing their thesis proposal. The research findings come to a conclusion to the need of
discussing its impacts on pedagogical implication in teaching and learning grammar in
the classroom.
Key words​: grammatical error, linguistic taxonomy, surface taxonomy, intralingual
transfer errors, interlingual transfer errors.

1. INTRODUCTION
Handing out a research proposal is an early step that a college student must carry on in
thesis writing subject as the final compulsory course of curriculum they need to complete
in order to finish their study at higher level of education and to get college degree.
However, writing thesis proposal is indeed the most difficult subject course to conduct
for many college students since it is the ultimate and real implementation all knowldge of
the subject courses and materials they have learnt and gained during years of studying in
the university. For a college student, it requires not only to fulfill scientific and academic
standard in writing research but the most importantly also to have good writing ability
and skills. So, that‘s why writing thesis for most college students are phyisically and
mentally stressful. it needs extra effors and motivation to
accomplish it. However, if they succeed it, it will certainly become the highest academic
achievement in which they deserve to be proud of. Furthermore, one among other
important aspects that college students must be aware of and
demanded in writing thesis is that it must be free grammar mistakes and errors. Different
from spoken language, written language in general and writing thesis in particular
demand a highly standardized language form. However, as a part of development process
in the acquisition of English language that EFL learners are learning, grammar errors in
writing are still problematic issues for most of them. Thus, it is not surprising to find L2
learners‘their thesis proposal full of
grammatical errors. Frankly speaking, by putting aside whether this fact indicates that L2
learners‘ failure in learning target language according to the curriculum employ or further
course material studied, it indeed also serves as abundant resource of information on
research issue of L2 leaners‘ second or foreign language learning and acquisition.
According to Brown (1994), errors are are noticeable deviations from adult grammar
reflecting the interlanguage competence of the learners. Additionally, Dulay and Burt
(1974) stated that error making is expected and that it would appear necessary and
essential to language
learning. In fact, it is a clear sign to show language learner actually develop and
internalize the rules of the language.
International Conference on Language Teaching and Education (ICoLTE)Jambi, May
16th – 17th, 2017 (ISBN: 978-602-61647-0-4)​186 Similarly, Coder (1991) states that
learner errors occur not only because of interference in native language but also they
reflect specific strategies that are employed by L2 learners in the process of development
of second language acquisition. language learning is a process of discovering the
underlying rules, categories and systems of choice in the language. Thus, in order for this
discovery to take place, L2 learners have to go through several stages and processes in
making errors.
Many language experts like Richard (1971 ), Corder ( 1991), Dulay & Burt (1974) point
out the advantages of finding and analyzing L2 learners‘ errors in the language they are
learning. For a researcher, for example; they provide evidence of how language is learnt
and acquired, what strategies or procedures the learners employ in their discovery of the
language. In fact, errors are essential to the L2 learners themselves and it is a method the
L2 learners use to test his hypotheses about the nature of the language they are learning.
For language teacher, in fact, they can gain much benefit from error analysis as well as
description because the error analysis provide them with feedback on the effectiveness of
their teaching materials and their teaching techniques. In addition, errors enable teachers
to decide whether they can move on to the next
item they have been teaching and they provide the information for designing an improved
syllabus or a plan of improved teaching. More importantly, errors made by L2 learenrs
are major elements in the feedback system of the process of language teaching and
learning. It is on the basis of the information the teacher gets from errors that he modifies
his teaching procedures or materials, the rapidity of the progress, and the amount of
practice that he plans at any point of
time. Given to the facts mentioned above, this study is an attempt to describe and explain
what dominant grammatical errors of fifth year students of English Education
Department made in writing their thesis proposal. Thus, concerning with pedagogy
aspects this research is leaded to seek to answer the following questions​:

(1).What are the dominant types of grammatical

errors made by the fifth year of English education students in writing thesis
proposal?,​ ​and

■ (2) What might be pedagogical impacts of the error

findings?

Error analysis, a branch of applied linguistics emerged in

the sixties to reveal that learner errors are not only because

of interference in native language but also they reflect

specific strategies that are employed by L2 learners in the

process of development of second language acquisition.

There are two mains error taxonomies namely; surface

strategy taxonomy and linguistic taxonomies

1.1. Linguistic Taxonomy Errors

Dulay et al.(1974) explain linguistic category taxonomies

classify errors according to either or

both the language component and the particular linguistic

constituent the error effects.

Language components include phonology (pronunciation),

syntax and morphology (grammar),

semantics and lexicon (meaning and vocabulary), and

discourse (style). Constituents include

the elements that comprise each language component.

1.2. Surface Strategy Taxonomy

Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1974) state surface strategy

taxonomy highlights the way surface

structures are altered. Among the common errors are: (1)

Omission Errors​; Dulay, Burt and

Krashen (1974) argue that ommision errors are

characerized by the absence of an item that

must appear in a well-formed utterance. language learenrs

ommit grammatical morpheme much

more frequent than content words. For example ​“ he comes

my house”. ​the correct one is ―

He comes to my house​, Ommision is some necessary part

of words, morphemes, or

auxiliaries that may be left out by L2 learners because of

his ignorance how to produce correct

words in speaking or writing. According to Dulay, Burt,

and Krashen (1974) in Faisal & et all

(2015) , ommision errors are found more often in leaving

out the grammatical morphemes such

as verbs, article, nouns, preposition, inflections than the

content of morpheme which carries

meaning. (2) ​Addition Errors​. Addition errors based on

Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1974) are

characterized by the presence of an item which must not

appear in a well-formed utterance.

There are two categories of addition according to Dulay et

all (1974). Those are ​Double

marking ​and ​Regulation ​Double marking happens when

the learners failed to delete some

unnecesary item that identified as error. For example, as in

“She does not reads the book.​‖ In

the example, there are two tenses marker: ​“does” ​and

“reads”​. ​The used of auxiliary and verb

International Conference on Language Teaching and

Education (ICoLTE)

Jambi, May 16th – 17th, 2017 (ISBN: 978-602-61647-0-4)

187
seem as such phenomena that be common errors in

constructing sentences. Regulation occurs

when learners confuse to decide the use of regular and

irregular form. For instance: ​“eated”

and ​“childs”. ​These kind of errors happened when learners

use the tense marker–ed in

irregular verb or when putting the suffix –s in the noun that

do not have the addition –​s f​ orm. (3).

Misinformation errors​; Dulay et al.(1974) define

misformation errors are characterized by the

use of the wrong form of the morphemes or structure. For

example: ―I am believing in you.‖ In

this case the learners were supplied present continuous

tense marker, even though it was just

not the right, (4). ​Misordering errors. ​Dulay, Burt, and

Krashen (1974) state misordering errors

are characterized by the incorrect placement of a morpheme

or group of morphemes in an

utterance. For instance: ―I knowldge of target language‘s

rule and principle they are learning. As

Richard (1971) confirms, this happens when learners

attemp to build up their own hypotheis

which lead to the wrong judgment about the target

language because of their limited knowldge

in applying the rules of the target language. According to

Brown (2002), an intralingual error is a

type of errors that usually occur within the language that is

being learnt. These errors are not

influenced by the mother tongue but reflect the general

characteristics of rule learning such as

overgeneralization, incomplete application of rules and

failure to learn conditions which rules are

applied. In short, knowing the stage of language acquisition

of L2 leaners can be explained

through the study of grammar analysis. The second source

of error is ​Interlingual transfer

errors.​. Richard (1971:205) defines interlingual transfer

errors as errors that are caused by

interference of EFL learner‘s native language. These errors

are result from the learner‘s rule

application of the native language to elements of the target

language they are learning in its

written or spoken forms. When learning a new language, a

learner tends to conciously or

unconciously connect between what they already know in

their native language and what they

do not know in the new language. In other words, the

learner carries over the existing knowldge

of their native language to the performance of the language

they are learning (Ellis, 1997:28).

Furthermore Ellis (2008: 350) states that the interference of

learner‘s native language occurs at

various areas of language elements such as in phonology,

morphology, grammar, syntax, lexis,

and semantic.The influences reflect the degree to which

both native language and target

language being learnt differ or similar to each other.

According to Odlin ( 1987:7), the

interferences are stronger when the two languages are very

much differ each other. Krashen (

1981:65) adds that when the principle of learners‘ native

language is very different from target

language they are learning, they will find it very difficult to

comprehend and authomatically they

begin to apply the rules and structures of their native

language into the process of target

language learning

2. METHODOLOGY

The study is descriptive qualitative which was aimed to

analyze and to explain what dominant

type of grammatical errors that English education

Department‘s students at STKIP YDB make in

writing their thesis proposal and to find out what the source

of the errors are. In conducting the

study, the researcher worked in identifying, describing,

categorizing and evaluating the grammar

errors that the students made in writing their thesis proposal

as the ways and steps to analyze

errors, the way in which they are proposed by Ellis

&Barkhuizen (1987) in Hendriwanto &

Sugeng Bambang ( 2013:57). For this purpose, instrument

used was documentation which the

data were collected from fifteen thesis proposals of fifth

year students at English Department in

the academic year from August 1916 to February 2017. The

fifteen proposals were derived from

3 different thesis academic advisors who supervised 5

students each. The focus of the analysis

was the way they wrote the background of the problems in

their research proposals based on

the fact that it‘s their genuine writing that reflects their true

ability in writing.Then, the researcher

worked in ​identifying​, ​categorizing​, ​explaining ​and

evaluating types of grammar errors

they made in writing their thesis proposal based on

Linguistic and Surface Taxonomy and

source of the errors from prepective theories of L2‘s intra

and interlingual transfer errors. The

technique of the data analysis was firstly through

calculating the frequency of the errors in each

category and obtain quantitative data of the errors into each

of the category. Then percentage

of the dominant errors were calculated by using the

following formula.

International Conference on Language Teaching and

Education (ICoLTE)

Jambi, May 16th – 17th, 2017 (ISBN: 978-602-61647-0-4)

188

P = F X 100% ​P= percentage

N ​F= frequency of errors

N= total errors

Next, the errors were explained in detail discussion based

on the category of errors (i.e.

linguistic and surface taxonomy) and source of the

grammatical errors (i.e​. ​intra and interlingual

transfer: ignorance of rule restrictions, overgeneralization,

incomplete application of rules, false

concept hypothesis).

4. The Findings

Regarding the grammatical errors made by students of

English Department Education at STKIP

YDB Lubuk Alung, the errors occurred and defined in great

number of variety of grammatical

errors, starting from the incorrect use of the main parts of

speech (i.e noun, verb, adjective and

adverb ) to form an appropriate sentence, the use of

conjunction, article, determiner,

preposition, verb tense, passive voice, clause, and phrase.

The percentage of errors are found

through using formula P=F/NX100%. Each category of the

errors in linguistic taxonomy and

surface taxonomy is analyzed, explained and evaluated

using grammatical terminology to find

and discuss the type and the dominant errors as well as the

source of the errors. they can be

seen in the following tables and discussion.

4.1. Linguistic Taxonomy

Table 1. Recapitualtion of Grammatical Errors in Linguistic

Taxonomy

No Linguistic Category Frequency of errors Percentage

1 Subject-verb Agreement 120 15 %

2 Passive Voice 175 22 %

3 Verb tense 137 17 %

4 adjective 86 10,7 %

5 Noun 76 9,5 %

6 adverb 73 9,13 %

7 adjective 54 6,75 %

8 article 21 2,6%

9 pronoun 28 3,5 %

10 quantifier 29 3,6 %

Total errors 799 100 %

The table 1 shows the number of linguistic taxonomy errors

(.i.e. breaking down the language

components syntaxtically, morphology, phonology into its

linguistic grammatical terminology)

made by fifth years English Education Department at

STKIP YDB Lubuk Alung in writing their

thesis proposal.The numbers indicates that there are 3 types

of dominant errors made by the

students. They are in the incorrect use of subject-verb

agreement, passive voice, and verb

tense which comprise 54 %of total errors. The table also

shows that the students have problems

with parts of speech in writing in which the errors comprise

25,38 % from the total errors in the

linguistic components. It was found that their grammar

errors are quite complex and severe

since in many cases one sentence that they wrote in the

proposal contains more than one

category and source of grammatical errors. Some of the

students‘ errors are shown in the

following examples:

4.2. Surface Strategy Taxonomy

Table 2. Recapitulation of Grammar errors in Surface

Taxonomy

No Surface Strategy Taxonomy Frequency of errors

Percentage

1 ommision 176 34,78 %

2 addition 76 15 %

3 misinformation 187 36,95%

4 Misordering rules 67 13,24%

International Conference on Language Teaching and

Education (ICoLTE)

Jambi, May 16th – 17th, 2017 (ISBN: 978-602-61647-0-4)

189

Total errors 506 100 %

The table 2 shows the frequency of error occurances and

percentage the students made in

Surface Taxonomy errors which consist of ommision

errors, addition errors, misinformation

errors, and misordering rules. The misinformation rules and

the ommision are the two highest

errors that the students made in writing their thesis proposal

which comprise 71,7 % of the total

errors. The addition and misordering rules comprise 28,24

% from total errors. It indicates that

the most dominant type of errors that the students made in

the aspect surface strategy are

ommision errors and misinformation rules.

4.3.Source of the Errors

Table 3. Recapitualtion the Source of Errors

No Source of Errors Sub-errors frequency Percentage

1 Intralingual Overgeneralization 142 33, 41%

transfer Incomplete Application of rules 137 32, 23 %

False-analogy 67 15, 76 %

misanalysis 32 7, 52 %

Exploiting redundancy 18 4, 23 %

2 Interlingual 29 6, 82 %

transfer

Total Errors 425 100 %

Table 3 shows the frequency the source of errors of fifteen

thesis proposal of the fifth year

students of English education department at STKIP YDB

Lubuk Alung. It was found that the

dominant source of the errors occured in intralingual

transfer particularly in overgeneralization

and incomplete application of grammar rules that comprise

65,64 % of total errors in both

intralingual and interlingual transfer.

5. Discussion
In writing thesis proposal, fifth year students of English

Education Department at STKIP YDB. It

was found that their grammar errors are quite complex and

severe since in many cases one

sentence that they wrote in the proposal contains more than

one category of surface and

linguistic taxonomy as well as the source of grammatical

errors. As some of the students‘

sample of errors are taken and explained as follow as:

Incorrect : When the teacher ​give ​instruction,......

Correct : When the teacher ​gives ​instruction,....

Incorrect ​: This ​errors are clearer when the learner ​make ​a

written text

Correct ​: These ​errors are clearer when the learner ​makes

or These errors are

clearer when the ​learners make ​a written text.

The first sentence indicates the students‘ error in the use of

the verb ​“give” ​that should be

added by the inflection ​„-s​‟​ ​ending since the subject noun

is singular. So, in order the sentence

to be correct simple present verb, the verb must be changed

into ​„gives​‟​. ​In linguistic taxonomy,

what the student violated is the term of incorrect use of

subject-verb agreement. In term of

surface taxonomy, is categorized as an ommision error.

Dealing with source of the errors, it can

be said it is incomple application of rule that the student

violated.

In the second sentence​, ​The domonstrative adjective ​“this”

is not correct since the noun it

followed is in plural form, so it must be changed to be

―​these” ​. The use of the verb ―​make” ​is

also is not correct because it has singular subject and it

needs inflection ​“-s” ​tobe attached to

the verb , therefore, in order the sentence to be correct

simple present verb, it must be changed

into ​“makes​‖. It can also be explained that category of the

error in surface taxonomy is addition

errors while false-analogy is the category in intralingual

transfer as the source of the errors.

International Conference on Language Teaching and

Education (ICoLTE)

Jambi, May 16th – 17th, 2017 (ISBN: 978-602-61647-0-4)

190
Incorrect ​: Based on the problems above, it ​suggest ​to the

teacher to choose the

sutable method and strategy ....

Correct : ​based on the problems mentioned above, it ​is

suggested ​that teacher

choose the suitable method and strategy

Incorrect ​: Based on the indication of the problem above,

the research ​limited ​the

problem....

Correct ​: Based on the indentification of the problems

above, the research ​is limited

to discuss about.....

incorrect ​: English is one of the international language

which ​is use ​many people in the

world.

Correct ​: As an International language, English ​is used ​by

many people in the world

or English is one of the international language ​which is

used by ​many

people in the world

Some incorrect forms of passive voice made by the

students above show their weaknesses in

applying the correct form of passive voice ​“be+ past

participle”. ​Some sentences miss the

„be” to ​form passive voice some others miss the use of

past participle ​to form the correct use

of passive voice. In surface strategy taxonomy, it can be

seen obviously that this error is

ommision error while overgeneralization and incomplete

rules application of intralingual transfer

are source of the error

Incorrect : ​Speaking ​as ​an important communication skills

to convey ideas and

information sharing

Correct ​: Speaking ​is an ​important communicative skill

that is used ​to convey ideas

and share information

Incorrect : ​In the teaching speaking, teacher ​find of ​the

students‘ problems

when_speak English​, that are they not c​onfidenc​e ​when

speak English

Correct : ​In teaching speaking, the teacher ​finds out ​the

students‘ problems ​to speak

in English ​that ​they are not confident with.

Incorrect ​: In their mind, English ​so ​difficult because are

lack vocabulary, ​law

intonation, ​unmotivated

correct ​: In their mind, English ​is so ​difficult because they

are lack of vocabulary,

incorrect, intonation, and ​motivation.

Incorrect : ​they are not serious, because ​their shy ​with

other peope

Correct ​: they are not serious ​in studying ​and they are shy

to speak ​with other

people.

Incorrect ​; it is ​text ​which gives the information that

completed ​with ​the evidence​, ​the

facts ​and statistic to support the idea ​of the text.

Correct ​: ​it is ​the text ​which gives the information that

must be completed ​with

evidence​, facts, and statistic to support the idea.

Incorrect : At senior high school, the teacher ​using

strategies that are..........

Correct : At senior high school, the teacher ​uses ​strategies

that are..........

The sentences above shows some errors in Surface Strategy

Taxonomy ( ie. ommision,

addition, misinformation and misordering errors ) that the

students made in writing their thesis

proposal. Some of the ommision error that students made in

their writing show that they

sometimes missed the use the verb ​“be” ​in writing

sentence, missed attaching ‗-s‘ to the base

verbs in simple present tense, ommitted the use of suffix

―​–ent” ​to form adjective from noun,

ommitted the use certain word to give appropriate meaning

in the sentence, ommitted the use of

suffix​“-ed” ​to form passive voice, ommitted the use of

inflection―​-s” ​to the base verb to form

singular simple present verbs . ommitted the use of ​to

infinitive ​as complement after adjective,

misinformation of using ​preposition, verb- ing,

misordering in the use of ​“when ​with phrase

“to infinitive ​‖ as a complement. In term of source of the

errors, it can be seen that

International Conference on Language Teaching and

Education (ICoLTE)

Jambi, May 16th – 17th, 2017 (ISBN: 978-602-61647-0-4)

191

overgeneralization and incomple rule-application of

intralingual transfer are major source of the

errors.

Incorrect : ...it makes the students ​should ​work hard to

provide the concrete data and

more knowledge to convince the reader that the idea is

important.

Correct ​: ​...It makes the students work hard to provide the

concrete data and more

knowldge to convince the reader that the idea is important

The sample sentence above clearly shows that the use of

modal auxilary ​“should” ​is not

correct because the causative verb ​“make “ ​must be

followed by verb infinitive. Apparently,

there is an attempt of Indonesian word loan in sense of

meaning to be inserted into English

word. If this sentence is translated into Bahasa Indonesia, it

​ al ini akan membuat

will be ​“ H

siswa tersebut harus bekerja keras untuk...” ​The

insertion of the word ​“harus” ​or ​should” ​in

English might be correct according to the sense of meaning

in Indonesian language, While the

given word ​“should” ​in English is not appropriate and

redundant since the meaning of the word

“make” ​in this sentence is ​“ a must to do” ​, so adding the

auxilary ​“ should” ​will be incorrect

in meaning as well as in grammar. it is clearly seen there is

an interferences of the individual

student‘s first language to express idea in a sentence.

Incorrect : English has four language skills ​of each skills to

be mastered

correct : English has four language skills ​that each of the

them must be mastered

There is a false use of passive voices and singular object

pronoun ​“each” ​indicated by the use

of the sentence above. Object pronoun ―each‖ must be

used with singular countable noun, while

― ​base form be ​‖ in order to make passive with past

participe ​“mastered” ​must be used with

modal auxiliary. It is clear that this individual student has

grammar problems concerning with the

rule and principle of correct usage with quantifier in

count-noun and noncount- noun as well as

passive that made him/her ignore them in writing this

sentenced. In the aspect of surface

taxonomy, this error refers to misinformation error and in

the source of the error is categorized

as false-analogy.

Incorrect : In the teaching speaking, teacher ​find of ​the

students‘ problems

when_speak English, that are they not confidence ​when

speak English

Correct : In teaching speaking, the teacher finds out the

students‘ problems ​to speak

in English ​that ​they are not confident with​.

The sentence above shows that there is a false use of

definite article ​“the”, ​and the incorrect

use of preposition ​“ of ​― after the verb ​“found”, ​and the

inappropriate use of apostrope ​„s ​, and

incorrect use of the verb ​“speak” ​right after the

introductory word ​“when​‖. Definite article ​“the”

is used to indicate or refer to a particular/definite thing that

is mentioned earlier or at least

understood both by speaker and listener or by writer and

reader. the use of preposition ―of‖ in

this sentence is inappropriate because the verb ​“find” ​(V1)

takes preposition ​“out” ​( find out) to

intend the meaning of figure out or discover something. On

the other hand, the use introductory

word ​“when​‖ is not correct because it must take

―​subject pronoun” ​after it or it can be followed

with ―to infinitive‖ in reduced form. All of these

falseness indicate this individual student have

limited knowledge of grammatical elements mentioned

above that cause him/her failed to apply

the correct of English grammtical rules and overgeneralized

them all.

Incorrect : ​the students​‟​ ​do not follow seriously

Correct : the students do not follow seriously..

The sentence above is inappropriate because there is fault

use of ​apostrope „s​. It is a false to

use apostrope ‗s that is used to show posssession of

something before auxiliary do.

Grammatically and meaningfully the sentence above is not

correct. The explanation is that the

student has limited grammar ability and knowledge that

make him/her ignore the English

grammar rules especially in the use apostrope ‗s.

Incorrect : ​Without mastering vocabulary, leaners will

have ​less opportunities ​to use

their language learning around them and....

International Conference on Language Teaching and

Education (ICoLTE)

Jambi, May 16th – 17th, 2017 (ISBN: 978-602-61647-0-4)

192

correct : ​Without mastering vocabulary, the learners will

have ​few opportunities ​to

use language they are learning .....

The sentence above indicates that there is a incorrect use of

comparative adjective ​“less” ​that

is actually used for noncount-noun. In this case, ​“fewer”

grammtically is the correct

comparative adjective for the count-noun ―

opportunities‖. Because of their limited knowldge in

the use of this grammar items, they tend to ignore the rule

applied. So, in order the sentence to

be correct. In surface taxonomy, this error refers to

misinforamtion error, while in the analysis of

source error, it‘s categorized as false-analogy.

Incorrect : ​....after the teacher finished ​explains ​the

material, the students ​hopefully ​be

able to identify................

correct : ​...after the teacher finished ​explaining ​the

materials, the students ​are

hoped ​to be able to identify,....or ​after explaining ​the

materials, the students

are hopefuly ​able to identify..

The sentence above indicates the fault use of the verb

“explains” ​and as well as the fault use

of the adverb ​“hopefully”. ​In this case, the verb ―

explain” ​must be changed into ​“explaining ​―

with no additional inflection ​–„s ​because the verb ​“ finish”

must be followed by gerund. The

adverb ―​hopefully ” ​become inappropriate because the

sense of meaning is demanded a

passive voice or

verb tobe ​“are” ​. So, with limited of grammar knowldge in

using gerund, passive voice, adverb

make them not aware of these. In the aspect of surface

taxonomy, this error refers to

misinformation error, while it is categorized as false

analogy for source of the error.

Incorrect : ​Most of the students could not understand and

confuse ​with the content of

the text ​what would they write

Correct : Most of the students could not understand it, and

they ​are confused ​with the

content text ​that they are learning.

The sentence above obviously shows that the students are

weak in the grammar knowledge

about ―​independent clause and dependent clause” ​as

well as the correct use of adjective

and type of adjective. According to its form, parallel

conjunction ​“and” ​that is used in the

sentence requires one independent clause in order the

sentence to be correct. After conjunction

verb, subject and predicate are added in order the sentence

to have independent clause.

Participal adjctive is formed by adding suffix​-ing ​or -​ed to

verb​. In order to be correct particial

adjective, adding suffix​-ed ​at the end of word ​“confuse​‖

to become ​“confused” ​. In the surface

taxonomy, this errors are categorized as ommision errors

and in the analysis of source errors

are defined as incomplete –rule application and

false-hyphotesis.

5. Conclusion and Recomendation

The findings indicate that the fifth year students of English

Education Department at STKIP YDB

Lubuk Alung still have significant problematic issues in

grammar mastery in writing thesis

proposal, eventhough they have undergone four years of

English language learning during

college study. It was revealed that the most dominant

grammatical errors made the students in

writing thesis proposal in aspect of source of the errors falls

into ​intralingual transfer which

compromised 65,64 % of ​total source of the errors they

made. In the aspect of ​Surface

taxonomy ​falls into ​ommision ​and ​misordering ​errors

which comprised 71,73 % of total

errors. ​In linguistic taxonomy​, it was found that

subject-verb agreement, verb tenses, part

of speech ​(noun, verb, adjective, adverb) are the common

errors they made in writing their

thesis proposal which comprise 79,38 %. It was also

revealed that the errors made by the

students in writing their thesis proposal are constributed

mostly by the false and the

weaknesses of the students to implement the restricted rules

of grammar components they

have learnt not because of interlingual errors or interference

of their first language. This unique

findings indicate that method, strategy and technique of

classroom grammar teaching and

learning in the classroom are not effective and

unsuccessful. The pedagogical impact

concerning with the research findings might be in

reviewing towards the better design

curriculum and syllabus, and material of classroom

grammar teaching and learning in the

classroom as well as effective grammar feedback given that

lead students to understand or

aware the application rule of English grammar in writing.

Most importantly, overview and and

International Conference on Language Teaching and

Education (ICoLTE)
Jambi, May 16th – 17th, 2017 (ISBN: 978-602-61647-0-4)

193

review better recruitment system to new academic year

students to make sure that the

candidate‘s English proficiency and competence are

qualified academically to enrole in English

study.

REFERENCES

Brown, D.B. (1994). ​Principle of Language Learning and

Teaching (​ 3rd ed). New Jersey:

Prentice Hall Regent

Brown, D.B. (2007). ​Principle of Language Learning and

Teaching.​ New York: Longman

Corder, S.P. (1991) ​Error Analsysis and Interlanguage.​

Oxford: Oxford University Press

​ ew
Dulay, H., Burt, M. & Krashen (1974) ​Language Two. N

York: Oxford University Press

Ellis, R. (1997​). Second Language Acquisition​. Oxford:

Oxford University Press

Ellis, R. (2008). ​The study of Second language Acquisition​.

Oxford: Oxford University Press

Hendriwanto, Bambang Sugeng (2013) An Analysis of the

Grammatical Errors in the

Narrative Writing of the First Grade Students of SMA 6

Yogjakarta. ​Journal of Education

Vol.6. No.01

Krashen, S.D. (1981) ​Second language