(LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ) The interference of the mother tongue in the writing skills of the grade 10 students at Tinh Gia 2 upper secondary school

Rationale for the study

In Vietnam, the emphasis on English education has surged, making it a compulsory subject in upper secondary schools and a core component of university curricula Among the four language skills, writing is often regarded as the most challenging due to its demand for a comprehensive understanding of grammar and structure, as well as a broad perception of language nuances.

Writing is a crucial skill assessed in upper secondary school English tests, yet many students struggle to express their ideas effectively They often rely on direct translations from their first language (L1), leading to grammatical errors and poor writing quality This negative transfer of L1 features into the target language (TL) hinders their ability to achieve high marks and successfully learn English.

Understanding students' errors in EFL writing is crucial for recognizing the negative impact of mother tongue interference on second language acquisition By addressing these errors, students can enhance their writing accuracy and fluency, ultimately leading to improved English learning outcomes in the future.

All the above-mentioned reasons have inspired the researcher to carry out a study entitled

“ The Interference of the Mother Tongue in the Writing Skills of the Grade 10 Students at Tinh Gia 2 Upper Secondary School”

Aims of the study

This study aims to enhance the writing skills of grade 10 students by minimizing the negative influence of their first language, Vietnamese, on their writing The researcher seeks to achieve this goal through targeted interventions and strategies.

- To find out the most frequent L1 interference errors students committed when doing paragraph writing

- To identify causes of the students‟ writing errors – the interference of the L1

Research questions of the study

The study just focuses on writing errors caused by MT interference, the following research questions are proposed:

1 How much does L1 interfere with the students‟ writing?

2 What are the most common L1- related grammatical errors committed by the students in their writing?

Scope of the study

The study was carried out with four classes (10C1, 10C6, 10C7 and 10C11) consisting of

In the second term of the 2010-2011 academic year, 182 students from TG2USS focused on identifying L1-related grammatical errors in their final writing test papers Due to a fixed curriculum and time constraints, the study concentrated solely on these errors Based on a thorough analysis of the students' writing, several suggested solutions were proposed to address the identified issues.

Significance of the study

The study attempts to bring about some benefits theoretically and practically to the readers and researchers, especially to the secondary school teachers of English

In terms of theoretical benefits, the study could provide the information on the students‟ errors in paragraph writing in teaching and learning process

In terms of practical benefits, the researcher hopes that the study could be the references for teachers of English and the readers as well

- The result of this study could provide the information and evaluation for the students‟ knowledge of grammar, so they would avoid the same errors next time

- It would be useful for the teachers to improve the students‟ writing skills.

Organization of the study

The study consists of three parts: introduction, development with three chapters and conclusion

The introduction of the study provides a comprehensive overview, outlining the rationale, objectives, research questions, and scope It highlights the significance of the research and details the organization of the study, setting the stage for the ensuing analysis.

Part B, DEVELOPMENT includes three chapters:

Chapter 1 presents literature review relevant to the study

Chapter 2 consists of research questions, participants of the study, data collection instruments and procedures of data collection

Chapter 3 displays the major findings of the error analysis and discussions from the collected data analysis It also provides some suggestions for further teaching strategies

Part C: CONCLUSION summarizes the key findings of the study while addressing its limitations and offering recommendations for future research The REFERENCES and APPENDICES are included at the end of the study for further reference.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The interference of L1 in L2

L1 interference has long been recognized as a significant barrier to L2 learning, with studies from the 1960s highlighting that most errors made by L2 learners stem from their native language Researchers, including Lightbown and Spada (1993), have focused on these errors to understand the impact of L1 on L2 acquisition Brown (1994) emphasizes that second language acquisition is heavily influenced by a learner's native language, asserting that native language interference is the most apparent source of errors among second language learners.

Like Brown, Ellis (1995:19) points out:“It is a popular belief that second language acquisition (SLA) is strongly influenced by the learner‟s first language (L1)”

In the article "The Effect of The Use of L1 in a Multimedia Tutorial on Grammar Learning: An Error Analysis of Taiwanese Beginning EFL Learners' English Essays," Li-Ling Chen (2006) highlights that the use of L1 in computer-assisted instruction (CAI) did not significantly impact grammar learning However, an error analysis (EA) comparing Mandarin and English revealed that many grammar mistakes were attributed to L1 interference Chen categorized the most prevalent errors into eight types: (1) verbs, (2) punctuation, (3) lexicon, (4) syntax, (5) capitalization, (6) subject omission, (7) prepositions, and (8) articles.

Actually, in the process of learning a new language, the learners are often affected by their

MT interference occurs when learners transfer features from their native language, such as Vietnamese, into English This often leads to the application of native grammatical rules to the target language Binh, T.T.H (2005:9) notes that learners frequently think in their first language (L1) and strive to express their ideas in the target language.

In his 1990 reference book, Buu, H.V identifies that Vietnamese interference is a significant source of mistakes made by students learning English The common errors among Vietnamese learners predominantly occur in four key areas: grammar, word usage, sentence structure, and pronunciation While Buu notes these error patterns, he provides limited insight into the origins of these mistakes or the extent to which Vietnamese language influences learners' proficiency in English.

Errors in foreign language learning process

Mohideen, H (1996, cited in Maniam, M, 2010) agrees that MT interference is viewed as one of the main causes of errors in writing among Malaysian students He says that there is

MT interference in the areas of syntax, grammar, lexis and pronunciation

When learning a foreign language, individuals often rely on their mother tongue, attempting to transfer its structure to the new language This transfer can lead to 'positive transfer' or 'facilitation' when the languages share similar structures Conversely, if the languages differ significantly, it results in 'negative transfer' or 'interference,' which can hinder the learning process.

The influence of mother tongue (MT) on second language (L2) learning can lead to both positive and negative transference This study specifically focuses on the negative impact of Vietnamese (MT) on developing English writing skills, rather than exploring any potential positive effects.

1.3 Error in foreign language learning process 1.3.1 Definition of error

Throughout the history of English language teaching, various linguists and researchers have offered differing definitions of errors Corder (1973:259) characterizes errors as breaches of the code, highlighting that they represent deviations from established norms in language use.

In 1998, James defined a language error as a successful element of language use Dulay et al (1982) emphasize that errors represent the flawed aspects of a learner's speech or writing, highlighting deviations from established norms in conversation or composition Similarly, Richards et al support this perspective, reinforcing the notion that errors are integral to the learning process.

Errors in the speech or writing of second or foreign language learners occur when they use language elements—such as words, grammar, or speech acts—in ways that fluent or native speakers perceive as indicative of incomplete or faulty learning.

Chun et al (1982) emphasize that an error occurs when a linguistic item is used incorrectly, reflecting inadequate or incomplete learning as perceived by proficient speakers of the language.

Linguists, including Liski and Puntanen (1983), define an error as a failure to adhere to the speech patterns of educated English speakers This indicates that errors represent the unsuccessful application of the target language by learners when compared to native speakers' usage.

Lennon (1991) argues that definitions of errors in language can be ambiguous, as even knowledgeable language teachers and native speakers may perceive grammatically correct sentences as erroneous (Hughes and Lascaratou, 1982) To address this issue, Lennon proposes a more cautious definition, characterizing an error as

A linguistic form or combination of forms that is unlikely to be produced by native speakers in the same context and under similar production conditions highlights the distinction between native and non-native language use.

In short, based on the above discussion, the researcher hopes to identify errors in the study in the clearest way

Norrish (1983: 7) made a clear distinction between error and mistake He states errors as a

Systematic deviation occurs when a learner consistently makes mistakes due to a lack of understanding, as defined by Cunning Worth (1987), who describes errors as deviations from the language norms being learned The term "systematic deviation" highlights the repeated nature of these errors Chaudron (1986) further categorizes errors into two types: linguistic forms that diverge from native speaker norms and behaviors identified by teachers as needing improvement George (1972) characterizes an error as an unwanted form that does not align with the expectations of course designers or educators Additionally, Johansson (1975) posits that if native speakers are uncertain about the acceptability of a word or construction, it should not be deemed an error.

It is essential to distinguish between errors and mistakes in language learning Corder identifies two types of errors: systematic and non-systematic Non-systematic errors, which occur in a person's native language, are referred to as "mistakes" and are deemed insignificant in the language learning process In contrast, Corder reserves the term "errors" for systematic ones, highlighting their importance in understanding language acquisition.

Errors in language learning often arise from incomplete mastery of a language system, as noted by Corder (1974: 29) Unlike systematic errors, mistakes are inconsistent deviations where learners may occasionally use correct forms and sometimes incorrect ones, as highlighted by Norrish (1983:7) For instance, if a learner has not yet been taught a specific form, their inconsistent usage exemplifies a mistake Richards et al (1992:127) further clarify that errors stem from a lack of knowledge, while mistakes are typically due to factors such as inattention, fatigue, or carelessness during communication.

Linguists define a mistake as a non-systematic deviation from language norms, often resulting from factors like carelessness, memory lapses, or physical conditions In contrast, an error arises from a learner's lack of competence, ignorance of the correct rules, or interference from their native language.

MT and the general characteristics of the rule learning

Error is a complex concept, but for this study, we adopt the definitions provided by Norrish and Cunning Worth, as they effectively highlight the errors present in written texts.

According to James (1998:129), errors can be classified based on three criteria: modality, medium and level

Modality indicates whether the learners‟ behaviour is receptive or productive By this reference, there are receptive errors in listening and reading and productive errors in speaking and writing

Medium pertains to the form of language, encompassing both spoken and written communication It involves errors that learners may encounter while engaging with speech sounds, which includes listening and speaking, as well as written symbols involved in reading and writing Understanding the interplay between modality and medium is essential for effective language acquisition.

10 together, we are able to specify which of the „four skills‟ the learner is operating at the same time of the error: speaking, writing, listening or reading

Contrastive analysis

CA (Contrastive Analysis, Benjamin Le Whorf 1941 ) is also termed as CLA (Contrastive Linguistic Analysis, Fries 1945) or CAH (Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis, Brown 1980)

Contrastive Analysis (CA) serves several key purposes, including identifying similarities and differences between languages, elucidating and forecasting challenges in second language (L2) acquisition, and creating effective course materials for language instruction.

In recent decades, systematic Contrastive Analysis (CA) has gained recognition as a valuable tool for predicting challenges in learning foreign languages It is increasingly understood that CA should not only identify these difficulties but also serve as a framework for explaining them Thus, CA plays a crucial role in the explanatory phase of language acquisition, providing insights into the specific obstacles learners may face.

EA It can help explain some of the errors actually committed by learners after these errors have been observed

Contrastive Analysis (CA) serves as a foundational method for examining first language (L1) interference in second language (L2) acquisition As noted by Richards and Schmidt (2002), CA emphasizes the comparative analysis of the linguistic structures, particularly phonetics and grammar, of both languages to address challenges in L2 instruction Originating in the 1950s and 1960s, CA emerged from structural linguistics and is grounded in key assumptions: primarily, that the main obstacles in learning a new language arise from L1 interference, commonly referred to as "language transfer," and that these challenges can be systematically identified.

CA, and (iii) teaching materials can make use of CA to eliminate the interference effects

Contrastive Analysis (CA) highlights the influence of a learner's native language (L1) on their acquisition of a second language (L2), particularly in phonological, morphological, lexical, and syntactic aspects It posits that learning a new language involves establishing new habits, a concept rooted in behaviorism, where language is viewed as a system of habits During the learning process, habits from the L1 can transfer to the L2 If the structures of the L1 align with those of the target language (TL), positive transfer occurs, allowing learners to apply familiar patterns successfully Conversely, negative transfer arises when discrepancies between the L1 and L2 lead to errors, highlighting the potential challenges learners face.

14 have no corresponding counterparts in the TL, L1 habits would cause errors in the L2, and learners would transfer inappropriate properties of L1.

Error analysis

Error analysis (EA) is a linguistic approach that examines the mistakes made by language learners, particularly those learning a second language (L2) As noted by Richards et al (1992), EA aims to identify the strategies employed by learners, uncover the underlying causes of their errors, and gather insights into common challenges faced during language acquisition This analysis serves as a valuable resource for educators in enhancing teaching methods and developing effective instructional materials.

According to James (1998), educational assessment (EA) involves identifying the incidence, nature, causes, and consequences of unsuccessful language learning Cook (1993) emphasizes that EA serves as a methodology for analyzing data rather than a theory of language acquisition This data can be collected through tests administered to students Brown (2000) provides a comprehensive definition of EA, underscoring its importance in understanding language learning outcomes.

The recognition that learners make errors, which can be observed, analyzed, and classified, has sparked significant interest in the study of these mistakes, known as error analysis This approach reveals insights into the underlying systems and processes at work within learners.

The concept of Error Analysis (EA), as proposed by Crystal (1987:112), involves a systematic technique for identifying and classifying the errors made by individuals learning a foreign language This approach utilizes various principles and procedures from linguistics to interpret these unacceptable forms effectively.

EA developed as a branch of applied linguistics in 1960s, and set out to demonstrate that learners‟ errors were not due to the learners‟ MT but reflected universal learning strategies

EA serves as a valuable alternative to CA in classroom research, highlighting the importance of errors within learners' inter-language systems While CA may be less predictive at the syntactic level and during the early stages of language acquisition, it helps identify challenges in learning a second language In contrast, EA can be directly applied for pedagogical purposes, enhancing the understanding of language learning processes.

Error Analysis (EA) extends beyond the interface between mother tongue (MT) and second language (L2) to identify various sources of errors Unlike Contrastive Analysis (CA), EA distinguishes itself by investigating errors from all potential origins, not solely those arising from negative transfer of the native language (Brown & Douglas, 1994:206).

Numerous researchers in linguistics have developed their own models for error analysis (EA) procedures, with Corder's model (1967 & 1974) being one of the most frequently cited by scholars such as Richards et al (1992), Ellis (1995), and Brown (2000) Corder's model outlines three key stages: (i) Data collection, which involves recognizing idiosyncrasies; (ii) Description, focused on accounting for idiosyncratic dialects; and (iii) Explanation, which serves as the ultimate goal of EA.

In 1984, Van Els and colleagues introduced a model for error analysis (EA) procedures consisting of six key steps: selecting a language corpus, identifying errors within the corpus, classifying these errors, explaining their nature, evaluating the errors, and implementing strategies for prevention or correction.

James (1998) proposes a comprehensive model for error analysis (EA) procedures that aligns with the steps outlined by Van Els et al (1984), but places a greater focus on the detailed description of errors His model categorizes errors into three levels: modality, medium, and level, as discussed in section 1.3.3 This structured approach to error classification is beneficial and accessible for various studies, including those conducted by the researcher.

Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) outline a five-step process for conducting an Error Analysis (EA) study, which includes: (i) collecting a sample of learner language, (ii) identifying errors, (iii) describing the errors, (iv) explaining the errors, and (v) evaluating the errors.

This study adopts the EA procedure model by Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) due to its straightforward approach However, the final step of error evaluation is not conducted due to time constraints and the study's limited scope The remaining steps are thoroughly described and discussed in the following sections.

(i) Collection of a sample of learner language

The initial step in Error Analysis (EA) involves gathering a sample of learner language, or a corpus, as outlined by Van Els et al (1984) This process includes determining the appropriate sample size, the medium to be analyzed, and ensuring the sample's homogeneity by considering factors such as the learner's age, developmental stage, and motivation Additionally, Corder (1974) highlights four key aspects to focus on during sample collection.

First, it is necessary to identify the size of the sample Researchers have identified three broad types of EA These types are: massive, specific and incidental samples

Collecting well-defined samples of learner language is essential for accurately identifying the types of errors made by learners and the conditions under which these errors occur This importance stems from the fact that various factors can influence the errors learners produce For instance, learners may make mistakes in speaking but not in writing due to the differing processing conditions associated with each mode of communication.

The researcher determines the method for sample collection, focusing on learner language that can either represent natural, spontaneous use or be elicited through specific techniques While natural samples are typically preferred, learners often generate limited spontaneous data, making elicited data a viable alternative The research identifies two primary types of elicitation: "Clinical elicitation" and "Experimental methods."

The identification of error elicitation is insufficient to determine the appropriate data collection instruments for research According to James (1998), there are three primary elicitation techniques: observational, experimental, and introspective Observational techniques emphasize natural settings, whereas experimental techniques focus on manipulation within the research environment.

Observational techniques are conducted with such classroom activities as role play, information gap activities, simulations, involving pairs and groups of learners

METHODOLOGY

Research questions of the study

As mentioned in part A.3, the researcher sets the aim of the study to seek answers to the following research questions:

1) How much does L1 interfere with students‟ errors?

2) What are the most common L1- related grammatical errors committed by the students in their writing?

Participants of the study

Due to time constraints, the study was limited to four classes of grade 10 students at Tinh Gia 2 Upper Secondary School during the second term of the 2010-2011 academic year A total of 182 students participated, with class sizes of approximately 50 students each: 45 from class 10C1, 46 from class 10C6, 46 from class 10C7, and 45 from class 10C11 The participants, both male and female, were aged 15 to 16 years.

Data collection instruments

The test paper is one research instrument used to investigate errors and explain the causes of these errors The test chosen for this study is the final test

2.3.1 Introduction to a test in general and description of the final test used in the study

- Periodic tests (45 minute test and the final test within 60 minutes ) include the following parts:

- Language use (grammar and vocabulary) (25%)

Teachers can modify the skill proportion in tests, ensuring that no skill's weight differs by more than 10% (Ministry of Education and Training, 2009-2010) However, listening skills are frequently neglected due to inadequate facilities at schools in Thanh Hoa, particularly at Tinh Gia 2 Upper Secondary School Additionally, writing assignments should be limited to 100-120 words in length.

The study utilized the final test from the academic year 2010-2011, which was administered at the conclusion of the second term, following the completion of the textbook by the students.

The researcher selected this test for three key reasons: firstly, to assist students in overcoming challenges during their final term test using EA; secondly, the final term test effectively uncovers a wider range of errors related to students' fundamental understanding of the English curriculum compared to other assessments; and thirdly, it allows for the observation of mother tongue interference in students' second language writing, particularly in paragraph composition.

The test was designed in accordance with the objectives of the new English textbook "Tiếng Anh 10" by Hoang Van Van and colleagues It comprised four sections: Listening, Reading, Language Use, and Writing, to be completed in 60 minutes However, this study focuses solely on the writing component, as it aims to investigate L1-related grammatical errors in written paragraphs, as outlined in the introduction.

The students were asked to choose one of the following topics to write about (within 100 -

- write about your father‟s or mother‟s daily routine

- write a description of a place (a city / a town / a village…) in Vietnam you know well

- write short paragraphs about advantages and disadvantages of the mass media (computer/television/radio )

- write about your most memorable thing in your life

The procedures of data collection from the test in this study were conducted in accordance with the key procedures of error analysis presented in chapter 1, section 1.5.2

The tests were administered to each class, with supervisors ensuring that students completed them independently, without consulting dictionaries, grammar books, or copying from peers A substantial sample of 182 test papers was collected immediately after completion To facilitate scoring and returning the papers to the school, copies were made The researcher reviewed these copies before they were returned to the school.

Errors in the test papers were identified and then classified into different error sub- categories These errors were then analyzed for possible causes.

Coding the writtings

Coding is the process of assigning codes to groups of data collected with an aim to simplify and standardize the data for analytical purposes (Hughes, B and Tight, M, 1996:

Coding plays a crucial role in research success, as it directly impacts data analysis and shapes the conclusions drawn from the study.

Coding data collected in this study is coding 10C1: from 1-45, 10C6: from 46-91 , 10C7: 92-138 from and 10C11: from 139-182

This chapter thoroughly outlines the study's methodology, detailing the research questions and participant demographics It also describes the instruments and procedures used for data collection The subsequent chapter will focus on the key findings and discussions derived from the analysis of the test papers.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Data Analysis and discussion

This study's EA follows the essential procedures outlined in chapter 1, section 1.5.2 Chapter 2, section 2.3.2 presents the collection of a learner language sample Subsequent sub-sections address the identification, description, and explanation of errors.

The researcher meticulously identified errors in students' test papers, creating a detailed score sheet that categorized error types with specific symbols, such as using the number 1 for verb-related mistakes This score sheet facilitated the calculation of error rates in both percentage and average forms, clearly indicating the number of errors made by students in each class.

Errors were identified using trusted and validated sources, specifically “A University Grammar of English” by Quirk and Greenbaum (1976) and “English Grammar in Use” by Murphy (1994).

In a study involving 182 test-takers, the final-term test examination revealed a total of 2,120 errors in the written test papers after thorough identification and calculation of mistakes.

3.1.1.2 Description and discussion on the five most frequent types of errors

The error classification was derived from the discussion in Chapter 1, Section 1.3.3, categorizing the identified errors into three types based on James (1998:129) Detailed classifications can be found in Appendix 2 The following table presents the results of the error classification from the test papers, highlighting the number and types of errors made by students in their final assessment.

Error Types Error frequency/ No of errors Error rate (%)

Table 2 presents the total number of errors identified in the test papers The error rate for each category is calculated by dividing the number of errors in that category by the total number of errors across all categories, then multiplying by 100% This method provides a clear percentage representation of errors, allowing for a detailed analysis of performance across different areas.

The analysis revealed a total of 280 lexical errors and 197 misspellings in the test papers While the errors identified included both spelling and grammatical issues, the researcher focused primarily on detailing the grammatical error categories, in line with the study's objectives.

By analyzing the frequency of errors, the researcher can pinpoint both the most and least common mistakes made by students To determine the frequency of each error, the researcher utilized a specific formula: n1.

P = × 100% in which: P : percentage of each error ΣN n1 : number of errors per category ΣN: total of the whole errors

Of the errors committed by the students, it can be seen that there are verb errors rating 32.3%, noun errors (14.2%), lexical errors (13.2%), word order errors (11.7%),

The study identifies seven common grammatical error categories, with misspellings accounting for 9.3%, article errors at 8.4%, and prepositional errors at 5.2% Due to time constraints and study objectives, the analysis will concentrate on five typical categories of errors Each category will include examples followed by a discussion and explanation of the findings.

In this study, verb errors were the most prevalent, accounting for 685 instances, which represents 32.3% of all errors made by students in their final tests.

Errors in subject-verb agreement were identified in test papers, with students frequently misusing plural and singular verbs Many students neglected to properly conjugate verbs, often using plural forms instead of singular ones, regardless of the subject.

1 E S: The city cover an area of 3.344,7 square kilometrers

C S: The city covers an area of 3.344,7 square kilometrers

2 E S: My mother often go to work at 6:30 a.m every day

C S: My mother often goes to work at 6:30 a.m every day

3 E S: Almost everyone enjoy watching TV

C S: Almost everyone enjoys watching TV

4 E S: Besides its advantages, television also have some disadvantages

C S: Besides its advantages, television also has some disadvantages

Errors in tense usage are prevalent among grade 10 students, particularly with verb forms The most common mistakes arise from the tendency to favor the simple past tense in narrative writing, which is essential for describing past events However, students frequently substitute other tenses inappropriately, leading to confusion and inaccuracies in their writing.

1 E S: Last summer, I spend my holidays in Sam Son

C S: Last summer, I spent my holidays in Sam Son

2 E S: When I am small, I often swim in the river with my friends

C S: When I was small, I often swam in the river with my friends

One common mistake among Vietnamese learners of English is the omission of the infinitive "to" before the simple form of a verb This error often occurs in sentences that require the infinitive form, leading to grammatical inaccuracies For instance, instead of saying "I want go," the correct form should be "I want to go." Addressing this issue is essential for improving English proficiency and ensuring proper sentence structure.

1 E S: We decided break a door to save him

C S: They decided to break a door to save him

2 E S: They agreed give me some money

C S: They agreed to give me some money

Omission of verbs: Verbs are misused in form of passive or predicative For example:

1 E S: I ỉ at the beach with them all evening

C S: I was at the beach with them all evening

2 E S: When I ỉ in the room, I smelt smoke from the next room

C S: When I was in the room, I smelt smoke from the next room

The 2 nd highest error rates in this study occurred within the error category of nouns, with

302 errors, accounting for 14.2 % of the total Errors in the use of nouns are mainly morphology errors of plural –s

Many students often make errors by omitting the plural "s" in countable nouns, particularly when these nouns are preceded by numerals or other qualifiers This common mistake can affect the clarity and correctness of their writing.

1 E S: Ha noi is famous for many thing

C S: Ha noi is famous for many things

2 E S: There are a lot of good programme on the television

C S: There are a lot of good programmes on the television

Addition of plural-s: Plural-s follows an uncountable noun This type is caused by overgeneralization, so it is not discussed in the study

(iii) Errors in word order

This category of errors had the 3 rd highest level with 247 and 11.7 % of the total The following are illustrative of these errors

1 E S: It covers an area of 3.344,7 kilometres square

C S: It covers an area of 3.344,7 square kilometres

2 E S: I was born in a village small beside a river

C S: I was born in a small village beside a river

Articles are used in large quantities in English Therefore, errors in the use of articles occurred often in the test papers 179 errors made up 8.4% of the total

Omission of articles: is the most common errors Students tended to focus on the meaning of the nouns and seemed to forget about the following articles For example:

1 E S: The city has ỉ population of about 6 million

C S: The city has a population of about 6 million

2 E S: It increases ỉ popularity of sports and games

C S: It increases the popularity of sports and games

3 E S: When we got to the outskirts of ỉ city, the road to ỉ beach was full of cars

C S: When we got to the outskirts of the city, the road to the beach was full of cars

Addition and misuse of articles: are errors caused by overgeneralization Therefore, they were not discussed in the study

The fifth highest error are the ones in the use of prepositions with an error rate of 5.2% The main errors are the wrong use of prepositions

1 E S: It was ỉ the winter when I received a letter from my parents

C S: It was in the winter when I received a letter from my parents

2 E S: People can listen ỉ the radio at any time

C S: People can listen to the radio at any time

Addition of prepositions: is errors caused by overgeneralization or ignorance of rule restrictions Therefore it was not discussed

1 E S: The girl walked under the rain

C S: The girl walked in the rain

2 E S: Computers have brought benificial changes for human life

C S: Computers have brought benificial changes to human life

3.1.2 Discussion and explanation on the grammatical errors (i) Errors in Verbs

Errors in subject-verb agreement: Many times students failed to give the correct subject

– verb agreement MT interference could be offered to explain this category of errors

In Vietnamese, there is no distinction between third person singular and plural verbs, unlike in English, where such differences are crucial Consequently, Vietnamese students often mistakenly apply their native language rules to English, leading to common errors in verb conjugation This highlights the importance of subject-verb agreement in English, as verbs change form based on the subject, exemplified by the transformation of "go" into "goes." In contrast, Vietnamese verbs remain consistent, regardless of the subject's person.

- English I often go to work at 7.00 a.m

Vietnamese Tôi thường đi làm lúc 7 giờ sáng

- English They often go to work at 7.00 a.m

Vietnamese Họ thường đi làm lúc 7 giờ sáng

- English He often goes to work at 7.00 a.m Vietnamese Anh ấy thường đi làm lúc 7 giờ sáng

Errors in the use of tenses: The MT interference can be explained as a reason that causes this category of errors

Major findings

Interlingual and intralingual transfers are no doubt to have the greatest effect on error- making

The disparity between English and Vietnamese significantly impacts interlingual transfer among students At TG2USS, similar to their peers across Thanh Hoa and Vietnam, learners frequently substitute English words for Vietnamese equivalents, leading to unintentional errors in their language use.

In an analysis of 1,643 grammatical errors, 1,019 were attributed to influences from the Vietnamese language, representing 61.9% of the total errors This figure surpasses the 38.1% of errors (624 instances) caused by intralingual transfer Notably, verb errors, resulting from machine translation interference, were the most significant source of student difficulties, with 395 errors identified, accounting for 24.0% of the total errors in the test papers.

The reveal of the cause of errors relating to the use of L1 may help students avoid re- making these errors

Many intralingual errors stem from overgeneration, incomplete rule application, and a lack of understanding of rule restrictions To address these errors effectively, consistent practice and repeated exercises are essential.

3.2.2 Major findings on the most frequent grammatical errors

The study analyzed a total of 2,120 grammatical errors from 182 students across four classes (10C1, 10C6, 10C7, and 10C11) Notably, lexical and spelling errors were excluded from the analysis, focusing solely on grammatical mistakes Among the grammatical errors identified, verb errors were the most prevalent, constituting 32.3% (685 errors), followed by noun errors at 14.2% (302 errors), word order errors at 11.7% (247 errors), article errors at 8.4% (179 errors), and prepositional errors at 5.2%.

(110 errors) The above mentioned errors are the five most frequent grammatical error categories in the test papers

English learners frequently make more grammatical errors than lexical ones, a trend also observed among our students This study demonstrates that grammatical aspects should be prioritized alongside vocabulary in language instruction.

Suggestions for further teaching strategies

The study reveals that utilizing Error Analysis (EA) and Contrastive Analysis (CA) as teaching methods effectively identifies and addresses the errors made by L2 learners It allows educators to categorize these errors, providing valuable insights for TG2USS teachers to tailor their instruction accordingly Notably, many errors stem from students' attempts to apply Vietnamese language rules to English, highlighting the need for targeted strategies The researcher recommends that teachers focus on identifying students' learning challenges, minimizing negative mother tongue interference, addressing L1 errors, and encouraging the use of English in their learning process.

3.3.1 Teachers’ dentifying students’ learning difficulties

Recognizing learning difficulties is crucial for students to excel in English Language interference often poses challenges, so it's essential for English teachers to highlight the distinctions between Vietnamese (L1) and English By doing so, educators can assist students in minimizing errors in their writing.

3.3.2 Reducing the negative interference of the MT

The fact that the students tend to negatively transfer the L1 rules to the TL is unavoidable

It may be because the MT is firmly originated in their mind while their knowledge of the

To address the inadequacy of target language (TL) exposure in classrooms where teachers and students share the same L1 background, it is crucial to minimize language interference Students should be immersed in the TL through extensive exposure and learn English writing conventions by engaging with authentic materials across various text types Additionally, fostering a belief that frequent writing practice is essential for developing writing skills is vital Teachers must also create a natural language learning environment that encourages learners to use English as much as possible, allowing them to experience the language in a meaningful context.

According to Lightbown and Spada (1993), when learners engage in conversation, they are encouraged to articulate and clarify their thoughts and intentions, fostering mutual understanding This negotiation of meaning facilitates the acquisition of language forms, including vocabulary and grammatical structures Furthermore, conversational interaction enhances students' fluency and accuracy in writing.

In short, reading, writing, speaking and listening to the TL a lot may prevent the learners from strongly influenced by the MT

Some of the strategies for correcting interference errors should be presented as follows:

Understanding L1 interference is crucial for effective error correction in language learning Teachers should analyze the occurrence of specific interference errors and clearly explain the differences between the students' native language and the target language.

When addressing specific issues in language learning, it's essential to compare L1 and L2 in terms of morphology, semantics, and syntax Adopting a comparative technique allows teachers to focus on particular errors without overwhelming students To enhance learning, educators should provide varied reinforcement exercises and encourage peer correction, which fosters collaboration and helps learners identify their own mistakes effectively.

3.3.4 Encouraging students to use English

To minimize L1 interference in writing, it is essential to promote the use of L2 among students while respecting their L1 Teachers should avoid actions that diminish the perceived value of the learners' L1 compared to English English instructors must assist students in enhancing their English proficiency, necessitating a balanced approach that acknowledges the role of L1 while prioritizing L2 usage in the classroom According to Nation (1997), in classes where students share the same L1, teachers should implement various strategies to encourage L2 use, addressing reasons for L1 reliance such as low L2 proficiency, shyness, or lack of interest in learning English.

This study conducts a comprehensive analysis of errors made by students at Tinh Gia 2 Upper Secondary School, utilizing theoretical frameworks from Error Analysis (EA) and Contrastive Analysis (CA) It applies Corder's (1974) and James's (1998) models, with a particular emphasis on James's error classification model, which aids in identifying and categorizing errors The theories presented in Chapter 1 establish a foundation for understanding the potential causes of these errors, which are further explored in the subsequent chapter Additionally, the analysis of test papers offers valuable suggestions for improvement.

Verb errors, noun errors, word order errors, article errors and prepositional errors are the five most frequent grammatical errors in students‟ writing

Despite frequent reminders about the importance of correctness, students often exhibit systematic errors in their written English due to machine translation (MT) interference This highlights the detrimental impact of MT on the foreign language learning process.

This study identifies and ranks the most common errors made by students, providing valuable insights for teachers to understand and address these mistakes effectively It highlights the importance of error analysis (EA) in education, as it enables educators to recognize the challenges students face and tailor their instruction accordingly.

Interference errors in English writing among Vietnamese learners cannot be completely eliminated, but their occurrence can be significantly reduced as learners improve their mastery of the target language To facilitate this progress, EFL writing teachers should provide students with ample exposure to authentic writing, clearly explain the meanings and usage of new vocabulary and structures, and educate them about the target cultures.

To deal with interference errors, the teacher has to adopt the comparative techniques (L1- L2) and provide reinforcement exercises of various types

Creating a "natural" language teaching environment through communicative language teaching, along with pair and group work, significantly enhances the learning process for written English.

2 Limitations of the study and suggestions for further studies

This study is limited in scope, focusing solely on specific errors in test papers and aspects of Vietnamese interference in English, particularly regarding words and sentence structures Further research is necessary to explore the organization of ideas and examine how factors such as motivation, language proficiency, and gender may influence error patterns Additionally, a detailed analysis of lexical errors and misspellings is essential for a comprehensive understanding of their underlying causes.

The researcher’s study focuses on how first language (L1) interference negatively impacts second language (L2) acquisition This raises an intriguing question about the role of the mother tongue (MT) in learning a second language, presenting a compelling topic for further research.

REFERENCES Tiếng Việt (in Vietnamese)

1 Diệp Quang Ban và Hoàng Văn Thung (2010) Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt Nxb Giáo Dục

2 Nguyễn Đức Dân (1996) "Nhận diện thời gian trong tiếng Việt" Ngôn ngữ số 3

3 Cao Xuân Hạo (1998) "Về ý nghĩa "thì" và "thể" trong tiếng Việt" Ngôn ngữ số 5

4 Brown, G.A & Yule, G (1983) Teaching the Spoken Language Cambridge: Cambridge

5 Brown, H.D., (1994) Principles of Language Learning and Teaching Third edition

New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Regents

6 Brown, H.D (2000) Cross-Linguistic influence and learner language In Principles of

Language Learning and Teaching White plains: NY: Longman, 207-243

7 Burt, M & Kiparsky Co (1974) Global and Local Mistakes In J Schumann & N

Stenson (eds.) New Frontiers in Second Language Learning Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House

8 Byleen, E.(1986) Advanced Writing for Vietnamese ESL Students Journal of English

Grammar on the Web, January 1997

9 Byrne, D (1997) Teaching Writing Skills London: Longman Group Limited

10 Chaudron, C (1986) Teachers' priorities in correcting learners' errors in French immersion classes In R R Day (Ed.), Talking to Learn: Conversation in Second

Language Acquisition (pp 64-84) Cambridge: Newbury House Publishers

11 Chen, L.L (2006) The Effect Of The Use Of L1 In A Multimedia Tutorial On

Grammar Learning: An Error Analysis Of Taiwanese Beginning Efl Learners' English Essays http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/June_06_llc.php

12 Chun, A et al (1982) Errors, Interaction, and Correction: A study of Native-non-

13 Cook (1993) Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition Macmilan, Basingstoke

14 Corder, S.P (1974) Error Analysis In J Allen and S P Corder (eds.), The Edinburgh

Course in Applied Linguistic Vol.3 Oxford: Oxford University Press

15 Corder, S.P (1973) Introducing Applied Linguistics Harmondsworth: Penguin

16 Crystal, D (1987) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language Cambridge: Cambridge

17 CunningWorth, A (1987) Evaluation and Selecting EFL Teaching Materials London:

18 Dulay, et al (1982) Languge Two New York: Cambridge University Press

19 Edge, J (1989) Mistakes and Correction London Group UK Limited

20 Ellis, G., & Sinclair, B (1989) Learning to Learn English: A Course in Learner

Training Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

21 Ellis, R & Barkhuizen, G (2005) Analysing Learner Language Oxford: Oxford

22 Ellis, R (1997) Second Language Acquisition Oxford University Press, Oxford

23 Ellis, R (1995) Understanding Second Language Acquisition Oxford: Oxford

24 Fisiak, J (1981) Some introductory notes concerning contrastive linguistics In J

Fisiak (Ed.), Contrastive Linguistics Language Teacher (pp 1-13)

25 George, H (1972) Common Errors in Language Learning, Newbury House

26 Hughes, A & C Lascaratou (1982) Competing Criteria for Error Gravity ELT

27 Hughes, B and Tight, M (1996) How to Research Analyzing Data Open University

28 Ha Van Buu (1990) Common Mistakes in English Made by Vietnamese Ho chi Minh City Publish House

29 James, C.(1998) Errors in Language Learning and Use Addition Wesley Longman

30 Johansson, S 1973 „„The Identification and Evaluation of Errors in Foreign

Languages: a Functional Approach‟‟ in Svartvik (ed.) 1973

31 Lennon, P (1991) "Error: Some Problems of Definition, Identification and

Distinction" in Applied Linguistics, Vol 12, No 2, pp.180-196, Oxford, OUP http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/2/180

32 Lightbown, P.M and Spada, N (1993) How Languages are Learned Oxford :

33 Liski, E and Puntanen, S (1983) A Study of the SA Study of the Statistical

Foundation of Group Conversation Tests in Spoken English Language Learning

34 Maniam, M (2010).The Influence of First Language Grammar (L1) on the English

Language (L2) Writing of Tamil School Students: A Case Study from

Malaysia.www.languageinindia.com/april2010/mahendrandissertation.pdf

35 Murphy (1994) English Grammar in Use Cambridge University Press

36 Norrish, J (1983) Language Leaners and Their Errors Macmillar, London

37 Quirk, R and Greenbaum, S (1976) A University Grammar of English Essex,

England, Longman Group UK Limited

38 Richards, J.C (1971) A non-contrastive approach to error analysis In Richards, J.C

(ed.) Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition 55-63 Essex: Longman

39 Richards, J.C (1984) Error Analysis London: Longman Group Limited

40 Richards, J., et al (1992) Dictionary of Language and Applied Linguistics: United

41 Richards, J C & Schmidt, R (2002) Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied

Linguistics (3rd ed.) London: Longman

42 Swan, M., & Smith, B (Eds.) (1987) Learner English Cambridge: Cambridge

43 Tran Thi Hai Binh (2005) An Error Analysis on the Use of Cohesive Devices in

Writing by Freshmen Majoring in English at Thang Long University M.A

Thesis College of Foreign Languages

44 Ur, P (1996) A Course in Language Teaching:Practice and Theory, Cambridge: CUP

45 Van Els et al (1984) Applied Linguistics and the Learning and Teaching of Foreign

46 Wilkins, D.A (1972) Linguistics in Language Teaching Edward Arnold

APPENDIX 1: PART: WRITING OF THE FINAL TEST

Choose one of the following topics to write about (within 100 - 120 words)

- write about your father’s or mother’s daily routine

- write short paragraphs about advantages and disadvantages of the mass media (Internet/computer/television/radio )

TIEU LUAN MOI download : skknchat@gmail.com

APPENDIX 2: DETAILS OF ERROR CLASSIFICATION

Levels Categories of errors Types of errors from the test papers Examples of errors

Substance Misspellings Misspellings Many young people like listeninh to music on radio (listening)

Lexical errors Lexical errors I always miss that event (remember)

Verbs Subject-verb agreement He often go to work at 7:00 a.m every day (goes)

Errors in the use of tenses When I was small, I often swim in the river alone (swam) Infinitive “TO”omission We decided return home (to return )

Omission of verbs Watching TV ỉ good or bad (be)

Omission of past tense or past participle –ed Last summer, I spended my holidays in Sam Son (spent)

Nouns can often be misused in terms of plurality, such as in the sentence "There are many good programme on the television," which should correctly read "programmes." Additionally, a common error is the addition of plural forms where they are unnecessary, as seen in "Computers can keep large amounts of informations in a small space," where "information" should remain singular Word order is also crucial, as illustrated by the incorrect phrasing "I was born in a village small beside a river," which should be revised to "a small village."

Articles Omission of articles There was ỉ blocked door.(a)

Limitations of the study and suggestions for further studies

This study acknowledges its limitations, as it does not encompass all errors present in test papers or every aspect of Vietnamese interference in English It primarily focuses on vocabulary and sentence structures, suggesting the need for further research into the organization of ideas Additionally, factors such as motivation, language proficiency, and gender may be explored to understand their relationship with errors A detailed analysis of lexical errors and misspellings is also recommended for a clearer understanding of their causes.

The researcher’s study focuses on how the interference of the first language (L1) hinders second language (L2) learning Understanding the role of the mother tongue (MT) in L2 acquisition presents a compelling research opportunity.