An Analysis of the Most Common Essay Writing Errors among EFL Saudi Female Learners (Majmaah University)
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
This study was conducted to explore and analyze the most common essay writing errors among Saudi female learners at the departments of English, Majmaa'h University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Therefore, the aim has been to identify those difficulties from an error analysis standpoint and identify the sources underlying them. An analysis of a written corpus of forty students' written essays was thoroughly conducted. Types of errors were categorized, and the factors that contributed to them were analyzed. The participants were English majors in their third year of study enrolled in an advanced writing course during the first term pertinent to the academic year 2018-2019. Three essays were given to each participant to write about two to four pages using the narrative, descriptive, and compare/contrast organization. A writing difficulties questionnaire was further employed. The findings showed that the most frequent types of errors made by the participants were: punctuation errors forming the most troublesome area, followed by spelling errors, preposition errors, article errors, wrong verb tense, wrong word form respectively. The findings suggested that writing in English as a foreign language is quite challenging for students. Interlingual and intralingual transfer was found to be the source underlying the most common errors.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Khatter (2019) identified interlingual and intralingual transfer as the primary sources of the most common errors.
“They also agree with Khatter (2019) that identified that interlingual and intralingual transfer as the primary sources of the most common errors.”
From Overcoming error fossilization in academic writing: strategies for Saudi EFL learners to move beyond the plateau (2024) · cites this paper as Khatter (2019)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cultivating writing skills: The role of ChatGPT as a learning assistant—A case study
Punar Özçelik, N., & Yangın Ekşi, G. (2024) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-024-00296-8 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
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
“They also agree with Khatter (2019) that identified that interlingual and intralingual transfer as the primary sources of the most common errors.”
- Authors
- Khatter, S.
- Affiliations
- Majmaah University (SA)
- Corresponding author
- Khatter, Sanaa
- Venue
- Arab World English Journal
- Publisher
- AWEJ Publishing
- Published
- 2019-09-15
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 364-381
- ISSN
- 2229-9327 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2975462773
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 15.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Arab World English Journal (publishedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- SocArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- SocArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- 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
- EFL writing, punctuation errors, spelling errors, preposition errors, article errors, tense errors, language transfer, intralingual transfer, writing difficulties, English as a foreign language
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