ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . 2 - 3
CLASSIFICATION SCHEME .. 4 5
ANALYSIS DATA & FINDING 6 - 8
DISCUSSION

.. 9 -

11
REFERENCES . 12
APPENDIX 13 -15

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grammatical Errors Analysis in Students Compositions of

the Year
Six Students of Sekolah Kebangsaan Chenderawasih. The
Case Study :
Introduction
English is the most commonly used language among foreign language
speakers. Throughout the world, when people with different languages come
together they commonly use English to communicate. We are living in the
world where English is the most spoken language not only in the country but
all over the world. In order to learn English it can become really hard for a
person especially when he or she writing. Learning a different language is sometimes
difficult since the target language has different elements compared to the native language. These
differences sometimes cause students to make errors when using it.
This assignment primarily deals with the grammatical error analysis. It
consists of three parts which are information about participants, data
collection method and data analysis.
1.0 Participants
The respondents of the study are the year six students of Sekolah
Kebangsaan Chenderawasih. All of them had their English education in
National schools, in which Malay was the medium of instruction. English was
taught as an additional subject within the school curriculum.
respondents are from Year 6 Cemerlang and Year 6

The

Bestari classes

comprising of 15 boys and 20 girls. In class 6 Cemerlang, there are a total

of 10 participants, consisting of 4 boys and 6 girls. In class Year 6 Bestari,
there are a total of 5 participants, consisting of 2 boys and 3 girls. Thus, the
total number of the participants is 45 students. The students were selected
ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

from the advance, intermediate and low proficiency group to facilitate the
3

collection of analyzable essay of a certain level. And I choose fifteen of them

randomly. I chose them to be the subject of this research because they have
already learnt the English grammar and they also use more English in the
classroom since they will be having an UPSR exam and it could be easier for
me to analysis their grammar mistakes thus it would help me how to help
them in the becoming exam.

All of the participants have experienced

approximately the same number of

6 years of the education through the

primary education system. All of the respondents speak Malay and none of
them speak English at home and they come from non-English speaking background and
hardly communicate in English outside the school . All of the 15 participants were administered a
writing composition. They were required to write a composition entitled An Incident at the
school field within a period of 45 minutes and a minimum of 80 100 words.

This

composition follows the English format of UPSR, examination in which every student will have
to take when they are in Year Six. It is a guided writing. In the writing they were asked to include
specific details in their writing. After that, the three steps of analyzing the grammar were
followed which are collection of sample errors and identification of errors, classification scheme
and data analysis and findings. A summary of the participants of the study is provided in Table 1
which includes data such as name and gender.
Table 1.0 : Summary of Participants
Name

Gender

Asmawi bin Ani

Male

Muhammad Hanafi bin Ahmad

Male

Muhammad Hafiz bin Rosli

Male

Muhammad Rahimi bin Razak

Male

Jamal bin Ramli

Male

Syaharuddin bin Sabtu

Male

Hazirah binti Massek

Female

Intan Sareena binti Zakaria

Female

Nur Azlini binti Semaon

Female

Nurul Yadihah binti Shamsudin

Female

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nur Amirah binti Yahaya

Female

Nur Jadzleen binti Ali

Female

Nor Damia Qistina binti Rahim

Female

Putri Marini binti Ramlan

Female

Siti Hanani binti Zainudin

Female

Total

15

2.0 CLASSIFICATION SCHEME

The main source of data used to find answers to the research question is the written essays of 15
students of the Year Six. Classification scheme was utilized to analyze the errors in the essays. It
was used as a tool that allows teachers to mark written material done by students. All of the
errors in the essays were identified and classified into various categorizations. The grammatical
errors were classified into nine groups. They were errors in producing spelling, errors in subjectverb agreement, errors in the use of articles, errors in the use of prepositions, errors in tenses,
errors in the use of pronouns, errors in the use of conjunctions, errors in the use of punctuation
and errors in singular and plural form. Table 2 shows the analysis of errors based on type of
error, number of errors and percentage committed by the participants.
Table 2.0 Classification Scheme ( Analysis of errors )
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Type of errors
Prepositions
Subject-Verb Agreement
Tenses
Pronouns
Spelling
Punctuation
Conjunctions
Word choice

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

No. of errors
78
75
82
79
67
54
58
68

Percentage
12.2 %
11.8 %
12.9 %
12.4 %
10.5 %
8.5 %
9.1 %
10.7 %

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

9.
5
Total

Singular & Plural Form

77
638

12.1 %
100.0

The results of the study show that five most common errors committed by the participants were
Singular & Plural form, Prepositions, Tenses, Subject-Verb Agreement and Pronouns. These
aspects of writing in English pose the most difficult problems to participants. Taking the
percentage of errors, the results show that five most common errors that the participants
made were in Tenses (12.9 %), Pronouns (12.4 %), followed by Prepositions (12.2 %), Singular
and Plural Form (12.1 %) and Subject-Verb Agreement (11.8 %). The next noticeable error was
Word Choice errors (10.7 %) while Spelling and Conjunctions were ( 10.5 %) and (9.1 %)
respectively. Other errors that amounted to less were Punctuation (8.5 %). The five most
common errors and examples of errors from the corpus are shown in Table 3.
Table 3 : Most Common Errors and Example of Errors
Definition and

Identification of errors

error classification
1. Tenses ( Verb Tense 1. Last Thursday, in the
)

Correct sentences
1.

Last

Thursday

afternoon, Sharul and afternoon,

A mistake with the Nasir

verb
tense.

Sharul and Nasir

are playing football at were

the

playing football at the

field.

field.

2. They are was very

afraid.
2. Pronouns

1.

2.
The

They

afraid.
headmaster 1.
The

advised they
for not fighting again.

were

very

headmaster

advised
them for not fighting

2. Suddenly, the girls saw again.

he and

2. Suddenly, the girls

his friend are fighting saw

to each
ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

them fighting each

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. 6Prepositions

other.
1. They

ran

other.
room 1. They

at

teacher.

ran

to

the

teachers
room.

2.

He

lives

Melati.
4. Singular & Plural 1.
They
Form

at

Taman 2. He lives in Taman

Melati.
at 1.
They

studies

Sekolah

at

Sekolah

Kebangsaan Taman

5.

study

Kebangsaan Taman

Felcra.

Felcra.

2. He live in Taman Melati.

2. He lives in Taman

Melati.
Subject-Verb 1. The girls are saw Sharul 1. The girls saw Sharul

Agreement

and

and

Nasir fighting.
2.

Cikgu

Imran

Nasir were fighting.

are

advising them
for not quarrel again.

2. Cikgu Imran advised

them
for not quarrel again.

3.0 ANALYSIS OF THE DATA & FINDINGS

In analyzing the data, I use error analysis method. There are following steps
to conduct the analysis. The first step is collection of samples which we
decide what samples of learner language to use for the analysis and how to
collect these samples. After the collection of sample,
the second steps would be the identification of errors. At this step, I identify
the errors by
underlying the errors the students made. The third step is the classification
of errors. I group the errors that have been found and stating the classes of
the errors into table. Next step is the explanation of errors which explaining
the errors with given example of grammar errors and calculating how often
ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

the errors appear. Finally is the evaluation of errors involving tabelizing the
7

errors and drawing conclusion.

Referring to the steps of error analysis stated before, I conducted the
analysis. In the identification of errors, I studied the acquired data and tried
to find out the grammatical errors by underlying the errors. I tried to analyze
the data as objective as possible. Once the errors have been identified, I
classified them into 9 categories, they are errors in spelling,

errors in

agreement between subject and verb, errors in the use of word choice, errors
in singular and plural form, errors in pronouns, errors in using prepositions,
errors in the use of conjunctions and punctuation. In calculation of errors, I
calculated the errors in order to know how frequent these errors have been
made by the students. In calculating the frequency of these each error, I
employed the following formula in which total of the given error multiply with
100 and divide with total of the whole errors. By calculating the frequency of
each error, I can identify the most
frequent error and the least frequent error made by the students. Once the
errors are calculated and arranged, I tabelized the result of the analysis. This
table is meant to ease the identification of the percentage of each error.
Therefore, the result of the analysis of the grammatical errors in
guided writing

made by the students of Year Six of Sekolah Kebangsaan

Chenderawasih is presented in the form of a table The last step would be

drawing a conclusion based on the analysis. In this step, I have to make a
valid conclusion in the form of a brief description of the errors.
After collecting and analyzing the data, I found that there were a lot of grammatical errors. The
errors were classified based on the common English grammar. There were 9 classifications of the
errors. Six hundred and thirty eight (638) grammatical errors of various kinds were found; the
percentage were classified as follows.
Bar 3.0 The Result of the Analysis
ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANALYSIS OF GRAMMAR ERRORS

100.00% 200.00% 300.00% 400.00% 500.00% 600.00% 700.00% 800.00% 900.00%

12.90%
12.40% 12.20%
12.10%
11.80%
10.70%
10.50%
8.50%

9.10%

Based on the finding of the analysis, it shows that the students made a total of 638 errors which
consists of 82 or 12.9 % errors in tenses, 79 or 12.4 % errors in the use of pronouns, 78 0r 12.2
% errors in the use of prepositions, 77 or 12.1 % errors in the use of singular and plural form, 75
or 11.8 % errors in the use of agreement between subject and verb, 68 or 10.7 % errors in the use
of word choice, 67 or 10.5 % errors in spelling, 58 or 9.1 % errors in the use of conjunctions, 54
or 8.5 % errors in the use of punctuation. According to the findings, it can be concluded that the
students have not mastered the use of tenses. We can see it from the number of the errors made.
Although they had been taught about it before, they were still confused which one to use when
making a grammatical sentence. The students were still confused in making the agreement
between subject and verb and differentiating whether to use the definite or indefinite articles.
Also, number of students still misused in deciding preposition which preposition should be used,
whether to use in, on, to or at. Sometimes, the students over generalized the pluralizing of
nouns. They just added the s / -es without considering that there are some irregular forms of
nouns. Despite of that, there are some students also confused in deciding which pronoun should
ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

be used to substitute nouns, whether it is personal, relative, possessive, or demonstrative

9

pronouns. From the explanations above, I can conclude that the students still confused in dealing
with English grammar systems.

4.0 DISCUSSION
The results of the study show that errors that students committed were basically grammatical.
Almost of the students had a relatively weak vocabulary and their sentences were sometimes
incomprehensible. They committed errors in applying sentence structure rules in the English
language. Based on the findings, more than 12.9 % of the students having difficulties in writing
using correct tenses. Wrong application of verb tense can be seen when the students did not
ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

apply the correct tense to the verb in the sentences. It can be assumed that some of the students
10

are not aware of the different rules for tenses application. The use of some suffixes like ing and
past tense forms showed that these students are aware of the rules on different tenses application
and they have already know that these verbs needed to be used with different tense forms and
should not be used in the basic form. This is because some verbs written using different tenses
forms are not written in the basic form of the verb. For example, the sentence The girls saw
Sharul and Nasir fighting could be written in the basic form The girls saw Sharul and Nasir
were fighting. This shows that they acknowledged the ing form but they were not sure of the
complete past continuous tense forms and application in the English sentence. Examples of
wrong application of verb tense are shown below.
1. Last Thursday, in the afternoon, Sharul and Nasir

are playing

football at the field.

2. They are was very afraid.
12.4 % of the students were making errors in the use of pronouns. Pronouns is used to substitute
nouns. It has many types which are reflexive, indefinite, relative, interrogative and
demonstrative. Some of the students frequently made errors in this area. They are as follows:
1. The headmaster advised they for not fighting again.
2. Suddenly, the girls saw he and his friend are fighting to each
other.
Almost all the compositions made by the students having difficulties to
recognize the possessive pronouns. The sentences should have been
1. The headmaster advised them for not fighting again.
2. Suddenly, the girls saw them fighting each other.

Number of students demonstrated confusion for correct usage of preposition. 12.2 % of the
students making mistakes regarding correct preposition. Prepositions are always followed by
nouns or pronouns. They are connective words that show the relationship between the nouns
following them and one of the basic sentence elements which are subject, verb or object. It
usually indicate relationships, such as position, place, direction, time, manner, between their

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

objects and other parts of the sentence. In using a preposition, students should be aware because
11

there is no certain rule for this. They have to determine which preposition should be used based
on the sentences. Thats the main reason why students kept making mistakes when using correct
prepositions. Some of the errors made by the students are :
1. They ran at room teacher.
2. He lives at Taman Melati.
12.10 % of the students making mistakes with the singular and plural form. Some of the students
did not know that the plural form using the suffix s must be applied to the countable plural
noun. A possible reason for the failure to construct plural noun forms probably because in Malay,
there is no plural marker for a noun. However, for some intermediate and advance students, they
have already understand that English nouns have plural and singular forms. However, they were
not sure when they should apply the plural form. When the subject was in the singular form they
applied the plural form to the noun as shown in the examples below:
1. They study at Sekolah Kebangsaan Taman Felcra.
2. He live at Taman Melati.
Agreement between subject and verb is influenced by the subject form whether it is singular or
plural. To construct a correct sentence structurally, the verb must agree with the subject. Fail to
recognize this means we are failed to construct correct sentences structurally. Thus, the students
must be able to identify the subject whether it is singular or plural. As I stated above, in writing
a composition we should use past tense since it tells about past experiences. In past tense there is
an agreement between subject and verb. Almost 78 students or 11.80 % were making mistakes
under subject verb agreement. They are as follows:
1. The girls are saw Sharul and Nasir fighting.
2. Cikgu Imran are advising them for not quarrel again.
The least percentage of grammatical errors are the usage of punctuation. 8.5 % or 54 students
carelessly making errors in comma and full stop. Number of students especially for low level
kept making mistakes with the full stop eventough those mistakes should not happened. The
results of the study show that errors that students committed were basically grammatical and
from the explanations above, I can conclude that the students are still weak in dealing with the

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

English grammar. Based on the findings, there are some pedagogical implications might be
12

considered in teaching to improve the students writing ability. Teacher should give more easily
understood explanation in order to make the students more interested in learning English,
especially the grammar.Therefore, teacher should give more exercises in applying grammar not
only by giving the theory of grammar because based on the results the students seem not quite
understand how to differentiate when to use either past or present form of the verbs. Last but not
least, teacher could apply a method teacher explains the correct uses of the verb forms, gives
examples of the usage, and tests the students understanding which will assure the teacher that the
students really understand it. Otherwise, the students will face difficulties in differentiating the
uses of past and present forms of verbs whenever they learn English.
In conclusion, this study has shed light to the teachers to identify common language problems
students have, so that they can focus more attention on these types of errors. Such an insight into
language learning problems is useful to teachers because it provides information on common
trouble-spots in language learning which can be used in the preparation of effective teaching
materials. Also, by being able to predict errors to a certain extent, teachers can be well-equipped
to help students minimize or overcome their learning problems. Thats why, it is belief that
grammatical errors analysis help teachers a lot in handling the grammatical problems.

5.0 REFERENCES
1. Angeline,W. Robin,H. ( 2003 ) Topikal Orientasi Peperiksaan UPSR. SNP
Panpac Sdn.

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bhd.

13

2. Josef Essberger. ( 1997 2012 ) EnglishClub.com. Retrieved December,

21, 2012 :
http://www.englishclub.com/grammar
3. Oxford University Press. ( 2012 ). Oxford Language Dictionaries Online. Retrieved January,
3, 2012 : http ://oxforddictionaries.com
4. Schrampfer Azar, B. ( 1992 ) Fundamentals of English Grammar 2nd
Edition. Prentice Hall.
5. Suriya Kumar Sinnadurai, Ahmad Nasaruddin Sulaiman, Dr Zailin Shah Yusoff, Dr Nik
Aloesnita Nik Mohd Alwi, Dr Andrew Tse, Nor Yazi Khamis, Faridah Hamzah & Dr
Norrihan Sulan. Academic Writing Report. From Centre for Modern Languages & Human
Sciences. Universiti Malaysia Pahang.

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR

Intan Nurbaizurra binti Mohd Rosmi ( E30103110097 )
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

14

APPENDIX

ETG 321 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL ERROR