AN ANALYSIS OF THE WRITTEN GRAMMATICAL ERRORS PRODUCED BY FRESHMENT STUDENTS IN ENGLISH WRITING
Open accessAbstract
Abstract This study is aimed at providing explanation on the taxonomy of the grammatical errors made by the university students in written production of English. The data were obtained from twenty English texts written by students as a part of their task in writing class. The findings of the study reveal that the errors can be grouped into fifteen categories ranging from severe errors to mild errors. The categories for severe errors are word choice, verb group, article, preposition, plurality and spelling. The other categories are subject-verb agreement, pronoun agreementa nd dropping, relative clause, possessive, copula omission and mechanic. Based on these findings, the teacher of English are suggested to raise students’ awareness on these errors and provide sufficient remedies to prevent students from internalising such errors. Key words: error correction, error analysis, grammatical error, interlanguage
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Teachers play a crucial role in guiding learners to overcome these challenges and develop proficiency in using idiomatic language appropriately.
“Hamzah (2012) suggests that teachers play a crucial role in guiding learners to overcome these challenges and develop proficiency in using idiomatic language appropriately.”
From Overcoming error fossilization in academic writing: strategies for Saudi EFL learners to move beyond the plateau (2024) · cites this paper as Hamzah (2012)
The Introduction describes teacher-led error analysis and focused correction as ways to improve students’ grammatical competence. The concluding passage also recommends that teachers address recurring errors. Neither passage addresses proficiency in idiomatic language specifically; the paper’s focus is errors in English writing. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Thom, Nguyen Thi. 1986. Error Analysis and English Language Teaching in Vietnam. Unpublished MA Thesis TESOL Centre UC
- Wyatt, Victor. 1973. An Analysis of Errors in Composition Writing. English Language Teaching Journal. v27 n2 1973
- Zawahreh, Firas Ali Sulaiman and Jordan ajloun. 2012. Applied Error Analysis of Written Production of English Essays of Tenth Grade students in Ajloun Schools, Jordan. International Journal of Learning & Development. V2 n2
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Albelihi, H. H. M., & Al-Ahdal, A. (2024) · Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education · doi:10.1186/s40862-024-00303-y · Cited by 7 · see citing works
“Hamzah (2012) suggests that teachers play a crucial role in guiding learners to overcome these challenges and develop proficiency in using idi-omatic language appropriately.”
- Authors
- Hamzah, H.
- Affiliations
- Universitas Negeri Padang (ID)
- Corresponding author
- Hamzah, Hamzah
- ORCID
- Hamzah, Hamzah
- Venue
- Lingua Didaktika: Jurnal Bahasa dan Pembelajaran Bahasa
- Publisher
- Universitas Negeri Padang (UNP)
- Published
- 2012-12-02
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 17
- ISSN
- 1979-0457 (ISSN-L)
- 2541-0075
- OpenAlex
- W1720904162
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Lingua Didaktika Jurnal Bahasa dan Pembelajaran Bahasa (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
- Keywords
- grammatical errors, error taxonomy, error analysis, error correction, interlanguage, English as a foreign language, university students, written English, subject-verb agreement, relative clauses, spelling errors, word choice errors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
