Errors could likely be an integral part of the learning-teaching process. Writing errors of Arabic, in particular, are considered fundamental since they can act as significant data to determine the level of language proficiency, identify possible difficulties in student’s writing, and prepare further teaching aids and materials to meet students’ needs and problems. The objective of the current study, therefore, aimed to reveal the common types of errors and their frequencies committed by the students at University of Darussalam Gontor. The subjects of this research were fifteen students that were in the second year of their studies. The instrument utilised tests to elicit the primary data. The findings showed that the most committed error was idafa construction, followed by tenses and agreement. These errors were due to several causes, namely interference of L1, intralingual, overgeneralisation, and ignorance of rule restrictions. To cope with such errors, it is suggested that global errors and individual’s concerns must be taken into primary consideration by language teachers.
This study investigates spoken production of Indonesian L2 learners of Arabic examined by the frameworks of Local Impairment Hypothesis (LIH) and Missing Surface Inflectional Hypothesis (MSIH). Because the feature strength is absent from L2 learners, LIH claims that they will suffer from impairment at any stages of development. Accordingly, all participants will experience variability in the use of gender agreement. Conversely, MSIH predicts that such impairment L2 learners exhibit is superficial. Based on the view of MSIH, variability occurred in the inflectional surface feature system is because of mapping abstract features to the correct inflected forms. Thirty-two subjects who participated in this study were divided into two distinct groups: intermediate and advanced. Grammaticality Judgment Task was employed to collect the data of abstract knowledge of features, while Sentence Fragment Completion Task was utilised to elicit the use of surface inflected forms. Although the accuracy in the production of inflectional morphology was moderately low, the findings revealed that most subjects were aware of the grammatical features being examined in the study. Eventually, the findings confirm the framework of MSIH and were not in line with LIH claiming that the higher variability will occur in both tasks at any stage of development.
Cohesive devices are crucial points recognized as essential features of a good essay, yet employing them in an essay appropriately becomes problematic for learners. This study analyzes qualitatively cohesive devices to investigate EFL learners. It aims at examining how EFL learners apply cohesive devices in argumentative essays, the frequencies of cohesive devices errors in their writings, and the possible causes of EFL learners to produce cohesive devices. Twenty-five learners of the Department of International Relations, at a university in Ponorogo, were requested to produce argumentative essays that consisted of five paragraphs. Twenty-five essays had been identified with the number of errors of grammatical cohesion. Those errors were then analyzed to determine the possible causes affecting the learners’ errors. The find revealed that the number of grammatical cohesion utilized by EFL learners reached 2172, while 168 obtained errors. There was a heavy reliance on cohesive item use. The intralingual transfer mostly influenced the errors produced than the interlingual transfer. The intralingual errors percentage represented 96,9%; interlingual transfer errors reached 3.03%. It occurred due to the learners’ inability to employ the grammar rule. Hence, lecturer should employ the strategies for learners’ writing ability development, such as implementing collaborative learning, delivering the feedback, exposing learners to exercise, and applying a learning management system to result higher level of cohesion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.