NUGRAHENI, INDAH (2010) AN ERROR ANALYSIS ON SUBJECT - PREDICATE AGREEMENT IN ENGLISH MADE BY THE SECOND YEAR STUDENT OF SMK MUHAMMADIYAH GENTAN, SUSUKAN. Skripsi thesis, Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta .
![[img]](http://eprints.ums.ac.id/style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png)
|
PDF
A320050345.PDF Download (32kB) |
|
|
PDF
A320050345.PDF Restricted to Repository staff only Download (232kB) |
Abstract
This research paper is intended to find (1) the type of error in the surface strategy taxonomy of subject - predicate agreement in English made by the students, (2) the source of error of subject - predicate agreement in English mostly often made by the students. This is a descriptive qualitative research. The object of the study is limited on using subject predicate agreement in English made by the second year students of SMK Muhammadiyah Gentan. The data of the research are the answer sheet of the test by the second year students of SMK Muhammadiyah Gentan. The students answer the test given by the researcher containing subject - predicate agreement in English. The types of test are multiple choices. The researcher presents, identifies, classifies and describes the data using several categories of error factor. The result of the analysis shows that the types of errors made by the students are categorized as in surface strategy taxonomy and the source of error. The types of errors in surface strategy taxonomy of subject-predicate agreement are classified into four categories, namely omission, addition, misformation, and misordering. Misformation is classified into three categories, namely: regularization, archiform, and alternating form. From 30 data in the types of error, the writer finds 11 data of omission, 11 data of addition, 3 data of regularization, and 5 data of archi form. The sources are divided into four categories, namely: interlingual error, intralingual error, context of learning, and communication strategies. Intralingual error is classified into four categories, namely: overgeneralization, ignorance of rule restriction, incomplete application rules, and false are concept hypothesized. In interlingual error she finds 2 data. Intralingual error is divided into four categories, namely 17 data of overgeneralization, 5 data of ignorance rule restriction, and 2 data of false concept hypothesized.
| Item Type: | Karya ilmiah (Skripsi) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | error analysis, type of error, source of error. |
| Subjects: | L Education > L Education (General) |
| Divisions: | Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan > Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris |
| Depositing User: | Mrs. Gatiningsih Gatiningsih |
| Date Deposited: | 26 May 2010 09:02 |
| Last Modified: | 13 Nov 2010 05:12 |
| URI: | http://eprints.ums.ac.id/id/eprint/7169 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
