The Difficulties Facing by Student in Using Participle in Sentences
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35335/cendikia.v11i2.1670Keywords:
Difficulties Facing, Student, Participle in SentencesAbstract
This study deals with the student’s difficulties in using participle in sentences. The purposes of the study were to find out whether or not the students found difficulties in using participle in sentence and to find out the type of difficulties they faced. The population of the study was students. In this sampling, all the population has equal chance to be selected for the sample. The total numbers of samples was 32 students. The instrument used to collect the data was multiple choice test. This research was conducted by applying the descriptive quantitative design. The reliability of the test is counted by using KR21 formula. The formula testing result showed that the reliability of the test was 0,84, it means that the test was very good. The percentage of the student’s errors is dominantly occured in descriptive adjectives from 800 item occurrences, there were 436 errors which categorized into 5 sub categories on the use of adjectives and adverbs with the suffix–ly. The finding showed that the students found some difficulties in using participle, they were: Present Participle (22,52 %), Past Participle (63,73 %) and Perfect Participle (33,52 %). Past Participle was regarded as the most difficult type for them, especially in using it after certain verbs and in replacing relative pronoun, and then followed by Perfect Participle. And the last was Present Participle especially in using in it replacing relative pronoun and after certain verb. The percentage of each difficulty was taken by dividing the wrong answer to the total correct answer of the test.
References
Acha. Kompas. 2003. Jakarta. October 17.
Allen, W. Stan nard. 1987. Living English Structure. Orient-New York : Long man Limited, Madras.
Ali, Muhammad. 1985. Penelitian Kependidikan, Prosedur dan Strategi. Bandung : Angkasa.
Arikunto, S, Dr. 1991. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta : Rineka Cipta.
Arikunto, S. 1992. Prosedur Penelitian Praktis. Jakarta : Bina Aksara.
Anderson, Scarvia, B. et. Al. 1975. Encyclopaedia of Educational Evaluation. London : Josie-Bass.
Borg, Walter. R. and Meredith. D, Gall. 1983. Educational Research. New York : Long man.
Dash, N., & Dash, M. (2007). Teaching English as an additional language. Atlantic Publishers & Dist.
Fillmore, C. J. (1976). Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the Origin and Development of Language and Speech, 280(1), 20–32.
Fishman, J. (1996). What Do You Lose When You Lose Your Language?.
Finochiaro, M. And Shako, S. 1960. Foreign Language Testing, A Practical Approach. New York : Regent Publishing.
Gay, L. R. 1987. Educational Research : Competencies for Analysis an Application. Ohio : Merrill Publishing Company.
Ground Lund, E. Norman. 1976. Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching. USA : University of Illinois.
Ground Lund, E. Norman. 1977. Constructing Achievement Test. New Jersey : Prentice Hall Inc.
Hawhee, D. (2006). Language as sensuous action: Sir Richard Paget, Kenneth Burke, and gesture-speech theory. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 92(4), 331–354.
Hewes, G. W., Andrew, R. J., Carini, L., Choe, H., Gardner, R. A., Kortlandt, A., Krantz, G. S., McBride, G., Nottebohm, F., & Pfeiffer, J. (1973). Primate communication and the gestural origin of language [and comments and reply]. Current Anthropology, 14(1/2), 5–24.
Hornby, A. S. et. Al. 1984. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Keith, Porter. 2003. Globalization : What is it ? The Cold War Era and the Space Age have been replaced with the Era of Globalization for a definition from Keith Porter. Globalization.about.com. 08 January, 2004.
Lado, Robert, Ph. D. 1961. Language Testing. London : Long man Group Limited.
Lado, R. 1964. Linguistic Across Culture. Michigan : The University of Michigan Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2012). Complex, dynamic systems: A new transdisciplinary theme for applied linguistics? Language Teaching, 45(2), 202–214.
Makoni, S., & Mashiri, P. (2006). Critical historiography: Does language planning in Africa need a construct of language as part of its theoretical apparatus? In Disinventing and reconstituting languages (pp. 62–89). Multilingual Matters.
Plutchik, R. (2001). The nature of emotions: Human emotions have deep evolutionary roots, a fact that may explain their complexity and provide tools for clinical practice. American Scientist, 89(4), 344–350.
Oshima, A and Hogue, A. 1981. Writing Academic English. New York : Adison Wesley.
Ruiz, R. (1984). Orientations in language planning. NABE Journal, 8(2), 15–34.
Saeidi, M., & Mazoochi, N. (2013). A comparative study on bilingual and monolingual Iranian EFL Learners’ linguistic intelligence across genders. Life Science Journal, 10(6s).
Stanley, A. J. And G. Martin. 1981. Evaluating Students Progress. Boston : Ally and Bacon.
Tinambunan, W. 1988. Evaluation of Student’s Achievement. Jakarta : Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Thomson, A. J. And Martinet, A. Y. 1976. A Practical English Grammar. Oxford University Press.
Tuck man, B.W. 1978. Conducting Educational Research. New York : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Vockell, E. L. 1983. Education Research. New York : Mac Milan Publishing.
Gillette Wallace Jean and Temple Charles, 1988. Understanding Reading Problems. Harper Collin.
Wallace, M. J. 1998. Action Research for Language Teachers. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Wren. 1990. High School English Grammar. Singapore : Oxford University Press
Wette, R. (2010). Evaluating student learning in a university-level EAP unit on writing using sources. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(3), 158–177.
.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Cendikia : Media Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
