Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Language Literacy: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching Bahastra: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia
Suwandi Suwandi
University of North Sumatra
Humanities Education Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
ENGLISH INFLECTIONAL ERRORS MADE BY INDONESIAN DEAF PEOPLE IN COMPOSITION Suwandi Suwandi; Deliana Deliana; Desri Maria Sumbayak
Jurnal Bahastra Vol 2, No 1 (2017): Edisi September 2017
Publisher : Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30743/bahastra.v2i1.2865

Abstract

This research entitled ‘English Inflectional Errors Made by Indonesian Deaf People in Composition’ was conducted with the aims to describe what types of English inflectional errors are found in Indonesian deaf people in writing composition, identify what sources of the errors are found in the use of English inflection, and to find out the percentages. The Indonesian deaf people were from Indonesian deaf community groups on Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram. This research used a descriptive qualitative approach by applying English inflection theory by Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy. The data collection techniques were conducted by using online English writing test and documentation. The documents used to support this study were in the form of downloaded word files that showed the Indonesian deaf people’s online test responses. The results showed that there are 179 errors in total in Indonesian people’s writings. The error found most is in Third Person Singular Present Inflection with 51 errors (28.5%) and the least is in Present Participle Inflection with 16 errors (9%), and the rest are 18 errors (10%) in Preterite Inflection, 19 errors (10.6%) in Comparative Inflection, 22 errors (12.3%) in Superlative Inflection, 27 errors (15.1%) in Past Participle Inflection, and 26 errors (14.5%) in Plural Inflection. The source of error found most is Intralingual Error with 156 errors (87.15%) (False Concept Hypothesized with 6 errors (3.3%), Incomplete Application of Rules with 8 errors (4.5%), Overgeneralization with 23 errors (12.85%), and Ignorance of Rules Restriction with 119 errors (66.5%)) and Interlingual Error with 23 errors (12.85%). Ignorance of Rule Restriction is a source of error found most and False Concept Hypothesized is found least among the Interlingual errors and all the sources of errors.Keywords: Deaf People, Error Analysis, English Inflection
ENGLISH INFLECTIONAL ERRORS MADE BY INDONESIAN DEAF PEOPLE IN COMPOSITION Suwandi Suwandi; Deliana Deliana; Desri Maria Sumbayak
Jurnal Bahastra Vol 2, No 1 (2017): Edisi September 2017
Publisher : Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30743/bahastra.v2i1.2860

Abstract

This research entitled ‘English Inflectional Errors Made by Indonesian Deaf People in Wrtiting Composition’ was conducted with the aims to describe what types of English inflectional errors are found in Indonesian deaf people in writing composition, identify what sources of the errors are found in the use of English inflection, and to find out the percentages. The Indonesian deaf people were from Indonesian deaf community groups on Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram. This research used a descriptive qualitative approach by applying English inflection theory by Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy. The data collection techniques were conducted by using online English writing test and documentation. The documents used to support this study were in the form of downloaded word files that showed the Indonesian deaf people’s online test responses. The results showed that there are 179 errors in total in Indonesian people’s writings. The error found most is in Third Person Singular Present Inflection with 51 errors (28.5%) and the least is in Present Participle Inflection with 16 errors (9%), and the rest are 18 errors (10%) in Preterite Inflection, 19 errors (10.6%) in Comparative Inflection, 22 errors (12.3%) in Superlative Inflection, 27 errors (15.1%) in Past Participle Inflection, and 26 errors (14.5%) in Plural Inflection. The source of error found most is Intralingual Error with 156 errors (87.15%) (False Concept Hypothesized with 6 errors (3.3%), Incomplete Application of Rules with 8 errors (4.5%), Overgeneralization with 23 errors (12.85%), and Ignorance of Rules Restriction with 119 errors (66.5%)) and Interlingual Error with 23 errors (12.85%). Ignorance of Rule Restriction is a source of error found most and False Concept Hypothesized is found least among the Interlingual errors and all the sources of errors.Keywords: Deaf People, Error Analysis, English Inflection
ENGLISH INFLECTIONAL ERRORS MADE BY INDONESIAN DEAF PEOPLE IN WRITING COMPOSITION Suwandi Suwandi; Deliana Deliana; Desri Maria Sumbayak
Language Literacy: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching Vol 5, No 1: June 2021
Publisher : Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara (UISU)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (306.069 KB) | DOI: 10.30743/ll.v5i1.2867

Abstract

This paper  was conducted to describe the types of English inflectional errors found in Indonesian deaf people in writing composition, identify the sources of the errors in the use of English inflection, and to find out the percentages. The Indonesian deaf people were from Indonesian deaf community groups on Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram. This research used a descriptive qualitative approach by applying English inflection theory by Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy. The data collection techniques were conducted by using an online English writing test. The results showed that there were 179 errors in total in Indonesian deaf people’s writings. The most found error was in Third Person Singular Present Inflection with 51 errors (28.5%) and the least was in Present Participle Inflection with 16 errors (9%), and the rest were 18 errors (10%) in Preterite Inflection, 19 errors (10.6%) in Comparative Inflection, 22 errors (12.3%) in Superlative Inflection, 27 errors (15.1%) in Past Participle Inflection, and 26 errors (14.5%) in Plural Inflection. The source of error was Intralingual Error with 156 errors (87.15%) (False Concept Hypothesized with 6 errors (3.3%), Incomplete Application of Rules with 8 errors (4.5%), Overgeneralization with 23 errors (12.85%), and Ignorance of Rules Restriction with 119 errors (66.5%)) and Interlingual Error with 23 errors (12.85%).
Co-Authors Deliana Deliana Deliana Deliana Desri Maria Sumbayak