Ảnh hưởng của tiếng mẹ đối với kỹ năng viết của học sinh lớp 10 tại trường thpt tĩnh gia 2

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES    HÀ VĂN MINH THE INTERFERENCE OF THE MOTHER TONGUE IN THE WRITING SKILLS OF THE GRADE 10 STUDENTS AT TINH GIA UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL (ẢNH HƯỞNG CỦA TIẾNG MẸ ĐỐI VỚI KỸ NĂNG VIẾT CỦA HỌC SINH LỚP 10 TẠI TRƯỜNG THPT TĨNH GIA 2) M.A Minor Programme Thesis Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60 14 10 Hanoi, 2011 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES    -HÀ VĂN MINH THE INTERFERENCE OF THE MOTHER TONGUE IN THE WRITING SKILLS OF THE GRADE 10 STUDENTS AT TINH GIA UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL (ẢNH HƯỞNG CỦA TIẾNG MẸ ĐỐI VỚI KỸ NĂNG VIẾT CỦA HỌC SINH LỚP 10 TẠI TRƯỜNG THPT TĨNH GIA 2) M.A Minor Programme Thesis Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60 14 10 Supervisor: NGUYỄN BÀNG, MA Hanoi, 2011 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION……………………………………………………………………… i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………… ii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………… iii TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………… iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS……………………………………… vi LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………… vii PART A: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………… 1 Rationale for the study…………………………………………………………… Aims of the study ……………………………………………………………… Research questions of the study………………………………………………… Scope of the study ……………………………………………………………… Significance of the study ………………………………………………………… Organization of the study ……………………………………………………… PART B: DEVELOPMENT………………………………………………………… CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………… 1.1 Written language vs spoken language………………………………………… 1.2 The interference of L1 in L2…………………………………………………… 1.3 Errors in foreign language learning process…………………………… 1.3.1 Definition of errors…………………………………………………… 7 1.3.2 Errors and mistakes………………………………………………………… 1.3.3 Classification of errors …………………………………………………… 1.4 Contrastive analysis…………………………………………………………… 13 1.5 Error analysis………………………………………………………………… 14 1.5.1 Concepts of error analysis………………………………………………… 14 1.5.2 Procedures in analyzing errors…………………………………………… 15 CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………… 20 2.1 Research questions of the study……………………………………………… 20 2.2 Participants of the study……………………………………………………… 20 v 2.3 Data collection instruments ………………………………………………… 20 2.3.1 Introduction to a test in general and description of the final test used in the study…………………………………………………………………… 20 2.3.2 Data collection procedures……………………………………………… 21 2.4 Coding the writtings………………………………………………………… 22 CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION…………………………………… 23 3.1 Data Analysis and discussion………………………………………………… 23 3.1.1 Data Analysis and discussion on the errors from the test papers………… 23 3.1.1.1 Identification…………………………………………………………… 23 3.1.1.2 Description and discussion on the five most frequent types of errors… 23 3.1.2 Discussion and explanation on the grammatical errors…………………… 29 3.2 Major findings………………………………………………………………… 38 3.2.1 Major findings on how much MT interference in students’ errors………… 38 3.2.2 Major findings on the most frequent grammatical errors………………… 39 3.3 Suggestions for further teaching strategies…………………………………… 39 PART C: CONCLUSION …………………………………………………………… 40 Summary of the study…………………………………………………………… 40 Limitations of the study and suggestions for further studies…………………… 41 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………… 42 APPENDIXES………………………………………………………………………… I APPENDIX 1……………………………………………………………………… I APPENDIX 2……………………………………………………………………… II APPENDIX 3……………………………………………………………………… III vi LIST OF ABBREVIATION AND SYMBOLS CA : Contrastive Analysis CS : Correct Sentence EA : Error Analysis EFL : English as a Foreign Language ES : Error Sentence L1 : First Language L2 : Second Language MT : Mother Tongue SLA : Second Language Acquisition TL : Target Language TG2USS : Tinh Gia Upper Secondary School Ø : Missing word vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Comparing spoken language and written language Table 2: Total number or errors from the test papers Table 3: Parts of speech in Vietnamese Table 2: Number or grammatical errors from the test papers PART A: INTRODUCTION This part provides an overview of the study including the rationale, aims as well as the research questions and scope of the study Besides, the significance of the study and organization of the study are presented Rationale for the study In recent years, the teaching and learning of English have become a great concern in Vietnam English is now taught not only at all universities and colleges but also as a basic and compulsory subject at all upper secondary schools, including TG2USS Writing is one of four skills in language learning process and it is seen as the most difficult and complex language skill because it requires widely perception and needs good understanding on grammar and structures Along with language knowledge and other three skills, writing is often required and evaluated as a part of the total assessment of tests in two terms of the academic year of upper secondary school But there is a fact that students usually have a large number of difficulties in expressing their ideas in their English writing They normally translate word by word, vocabulary, idiomatic expressions and especially grammatical rules of their first language (L1) into the target language (TL) As a result, they not often get good marks or have good paragraph writings These problems cause a lot of grammatical errors in students‟ writing works In other words, the students negatively transfer features of L1 into the TL, and consequently they may encounter difficulties in learning English The better understanding of students‟ errors in EFL writing will help the students recognize the negative effects of the mother tongue (MT) interference in L2 acquisition and then avoid errors It will also help students improve their accurate and fluent writing and their English learning 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 Upper Secondary School” 2 Aims of the study This study is primarily targeted at helping to improve the grade 10 students‟ writing skills by reducing the negative interference of the L1 (Vietnamese) on their writing To achieve this aim, the researcher attempts: - 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 - To give practical recommendations Research questions of the study The study just focuses on writing errors caused by MT interference, the following research questions are proposed: How much does L1 interfere with the students‟ writing? 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 182 students of TG2USS in their second term, the academic year 2010-2011 Due to the fixed curriculum and limited time, the study only centred on the L1- related grammatical errors committed by students in their final writing test papers and based on the analysis of their writing papers, some suggested solutions were provided 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 Part A, INTRODUCTION presents an overview of the study with the rationale, aims, the research questions and scope of the study Besides, the significance of the study and organization of the study are presented Part B, DEVELOPMENT includes three chapters: Chapter presents literature review relevant to the study Chapter consists of research questions, participants of the study, data collection instruments and procedures of data collection Chapter 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 presents a summary of the study It also provides some limitations of the study and suggestions for further study The REFERENCES and APPENDIXES are at the end to the study PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW This part, literature review, presents a review of related literature that provides the theoretical background of the study It includes the main sections: section dicusses the written English vs spoken English, section addresses the L1 interference on L2, section examines errors in foreign language learning process, section mentions contrastive analysis (CA) and section 5, the last section, discusses error analysis (EA) 1.1 Written language versus spoken language A commonly held belief is that the nature of written language will be most clearly seen when being contrasted with that of the spoken language Many famous linguists have followed this approach such as Brown & Yule, Byrne, Ellis & Sinclair, etc Brown & Yule (1983) suggest that information is packed very much more densely in the written language than in the spoken form, which also explains its brevity and results from the presence of heavy premodified noun phrases, heavy adverbial modification and complex subordinating phrases In other words, the written language provides much more information than the spoken language with a more complicated set of vocabulary and grammar rules Ellis & Sinclair (1989) make a clear distinction between spoken and written language They point out that written language is formal and stable while spoken language is informal and variable Therefore, it appears much easier to provide a model of written language than that of spoken one Done Byrne (1997) also agrees with the view that writing is different from speech in a number of ways Speech takes place against the background of a situation and much of what we say can be understood from the situation; speech is addressed to a person who is present at that time and there is continuous interaction and feedback, which may be in verbal or non-verbal form That is not to mention the considerable amount of resources possible to be drawn from speech through the use of prosodic features, facial expressions, gestures Writing, in contrast, creates contexts and is a way of communicating with someone who is not present and may not lead to interaction There is also no use of the prosodic features, which is replaced by graphological devices such as punctuation and capitalization 36 exceptions such as hard, fast, soon, etc Because of the difference, adverb errors and adjective errors were made by students in the test papers E S: C S: E S: They were dancing and singing happy (Họ khiêu vũ hát vui vẻ.) They were dancing and singing happily Lucky, nobody was seriously hurt (Thật may mắn không bị thương nặng.) C S: Luckily, nobody was seriously hurt E S: It was raining heavy.(Trời mưa to.) C S: It was raining heavily (vii) Errors in the use of conjunctions Misuse of conjunctions: another common error the Vietnamese learners often make in writing is to duplicate conjunction, as their Vietnamese equivalents usually appear in pairs It is the case with the complex sentence containing subordinate clauses introduced by conjunctions such as “because”, “although” When expressions of this kind are used in Vietnamese, it is normal for the main clause to be introduced by a balancing word: (Bởi) + subordinate clause + (cho) nên + main clause Mặc dù + subordinate clause + + main clause E S: Because he drove very fast, so he had an accident (Vì lái xe nhanh nên gây tai nạn.) C S: E S: Because he drove very fast, he had an accident Although everyone was out of the building, but some people were seriously hurt.(Mặc dù người khỏi tòa nhà, số người bị thương nặng.) C S: Although everyone was out of the building, some people were seriously hurt errors in misuse of conjunctions that are influnced by MT were found in this study Other errors in the use of conjunctions were also found and intranlingual transfer was considered the possible causes of these errors (13 errors) (viii) Errors in pronouns Strongly influenced by the MT, the Vietnamese learners of English tend to make a lot of errors in the use of pronoun forms The system of personal pronouns in Vietnamese is extremely complex in comparison with that in English The difference in the forms of subject pronouns and object pronouns is an example 37 E S: Television helps we to learn more about the world ( Truyền hình giúp biết thêm thề giới.) C S: E S: Television helps we to learn more about the world Sometimes my mother helps I learn English in the evening (Vào buổi tối mẹ giúp học tiếng Anh.) C S: Sometimes my mother helps me learn English in the evening Omission of pronouns E S: Although Internet has some bad effects, more and more people use Ø (Mặc dù Internet có số bất lợi ngày nhiều người sử dụng nó) C S: E S: Although Internet has some bad effects, more and more people use it My village is rather small but I like Ø very much (Làng bé nhỏ yêu mến nó.) C S: My village is rather small but I like Ø very much In conclusion, both the interlingual (MT) and intralingual transfers are the main possible causes of all errors found in the test papers Causes of intralingual transfer were not discussed in the study However, how much MT (Vietnamese) interference in the students‟ grammatical errors is shown in the table below Error categories Error frequency Number of errors MT interference Intralingual interference No % No % Verbs 685 395 24.0 290 17.7 Nouns 302 168 10.2 134 8.2 Word order 247 247 15.0 0 Articles 179 84 5.1 95 5.8 Preposition 110 53 3.2 57 3.5 Adverbs 54 38 2.3 16 1.0 Adjectives 30 18 1.1 12 0.7 Conjunctions 22 10 0.6 12 0.7 Pronouns 14 0.4 0.5 1643 1019 61.9 624 38.1 Total Table Number of grammatical errors from the test papers 38 (Note:%= number of errors in each cause / total number of grammatical errors ) n1 P= × 100% ΣN In which: P: category rate n1: the number of L1-related errors or intralingual errors per category ΣN: total number of grammatical errors It can be seen from the above table that 61.9% grammatical errors were caused by MT interference whereas 38.1% were intralingual errors Of the former errors, verb errors accounting for 395 errors with the proportion of 24.0% ranked the first place MT also influenced a lot the use of word order with errors 247 (15.0%) ranked the second Then a large number of L1-related errors also occurred in the use of nouns with 168 errors (10.2%) Articles errors and prepositional errors were caused by the MT interference with quite a number of errors Errors in the use of pronouns appeared the least in the test papers That is to say, MT also did not influence much on pronoun use with students at TG2USS The above result showed that students at TG2USS had a lot of MT interference with verb use whereas not very much with pronouns 3.2 Major findings 3.2.1 Major findings on how much mother tongue interference in students’ errors Interlingual and intralingual transfers are no doubt to have the greatest effect on errormaking The difference between English and Vietnamese is seen as one the most influential factors in interlingual transfer Students at TG2USS like other students at other schools in Thanh Hoa as well as in Vietnam, may often transfer English words into Vietnamese to find equivalents Consequently, they make errors unconsciously From 1643 grammatical errors, Vietnamese language influenced 1019 errors, accounting for 61.9 % This rate is higher than the one caused by intralingual transfer (624 errors with 38.1%) Of grammatical errors caused by the MT interference, verb errors make students embarrassed the most 395 errors of this kind with 24.0 % were found in the test papers 39 The reveal of the cause of errors relating to the use of L1 may help students avoid remaking these errors In addition, many intralingual errors are traceable to overgeneration, incomplete application of rules and ignorance of rule restriction These kinds of errors may be overcome by practising and doing exercises repeatedly 3.2.2 Major findings on the most frequent grammatical errors The study yielded a corpus of 2120 errors from four classes (10C1,10C6, 10C7 and 10 C11) consisting of 182 students Lexical errors and misspelling errors were not discussed in the study because they did not belong to grammatical errors Of grammatical errors, verb errors accounted for 32.3% (685 errors), - noun errors 14.2% (302 errors ), - word order errors 11.7% (247 errors), - article errors 8.4% (179 errors), - prepositional errors 5.2% (110 errors) The above mentioned errors are the five most frequent grammatical error categories in the test papers As usual, learners of English often commit more grammatical errors than lexical ones And it is not an exception for our students The result of this study have proved that grammatical points should be considered as language focus together with vocabulary 3.3 Suggestions for further teaching strategies The findings have demontrated that exploiting EA and CA as pedagogical techniques is dicovering the errors of L2 learners and pinpointing the causes of such errors have been effective The findings of the study have also enabled us, teachers, to isolate the errors students made The most frequent error categories were ranked, which can be a good suggest for TG2USS teachers to better understand what types of errors their students often make and provide suitable instructions thereby Through this study, a considerable number of errors made by TG2USSstudents are proved to be the result of their attempt to apply Vietnamese language rules to the English system From these findings, the researcher suggests some strategies as: Teachers‟ dentifying students‟ learning difficulties, reducing the negative interference of the MT, dealing with L1 interference errors, encouraging students to use English 3.3.1 Teachers’ dentifying students’ learning difficulties 40 Identifying learning difficulties can be the first step that helps students master English As language interference is apprarently a common problem for them, English teachers should help students to reduce language interference by specifying the differences between Vietnamese (L1) and target language (English) in order to make them avoid making mistakes while 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 TL is inadequate, and because the learning environment is the classroom setting in their homeland, where the teachers and other learners are from the same L1 background It is clear that language interference is not easy to prevent; however, there are some ways to minimize it First, the students should be exposed to the TL as much as possible and need to learn the English way of writing through “models” Therefore, the teacher should provide a lot of authentic materials of different text types for them to read Second, there is a widely held belief that in order to be good writers, students need to write a lot Moreover, teachers should create a natural language learning environment in the classroom and the learners use English as much as possible In other words, the learners can experience the TL as a real language According to Lightbown and spada (1993: 83), when the learners are given the opportunities to participate in conversation, they are compelled to express and clarify their intentions, thought, opinions, etc in a way which permits them to reach a mutual understanding The negotiation of meaning, in turn lead the learners to acquire the language forms, the words and grammatical structures Conversational interaction enables students to gain 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 3.3.3 Dealing with L1 interference errors Some of the strategies for correcting interference errors should be presented as follows: First of all, in the researcher‟s opinion, enabling the students to understand their L1 interference is the most important thing in effective error correction The teacher needs to analyze how a certain interference error occurs by explaining carefully the difference of 41 the particular feature in L1 and L2 in terms of: Morphology; Semantics; Syntax depending on the specific problem involved In other words, the comparative technique (L1-L2) has to be adopted The teacher should choose only particular errors to focus on at one time of making corrections so as not to depress the learners Teacher should provide reinforcement exercises of various types Peer correction is a good form of correction which helps lesrners cooperate and develop their ability to see their own mistakes 3.3.4 Encouraging students to use English In order to avoid L1 interference in writing, it is better to encourage students to use L2 teachers need to show respect for the learners‟ L1 and avoid doing things that make the L1 seem inferior to English At the same time, it is the English teacher‟s job to help learners develop their proficiency in English Therefore, a balance aproach is needed which sees a role for the L1 but also recognizes the importance of maximizing L2 use in the clasroom Nation (1997) suggested that in classes where learners all share the same L1, teachers need to use a range of options to encourage learners to use the L2 as much as possible The following range of options is based on reasons why learners use L1 when they should be using L2 These reasons include low proficiency in the L2, shyness in using L2, or simply a lack of interest in learning L2 42 PART C: CONCLUSION Conclusion This study has covered three parts of a full analysis of errors committed by students at Tinh Gia Upper Secondary School The study is carried out on various theoretical bases of EA and CA The models for EA by Corder (1974) and James (1998) are applied in this study; especially, the error classification model by James helps the researcher much in identifying and classifying Theories of the explanation of errors at the end of chapter lay a foundation on the researcher‟s statement about the possible causes of errors in the following chapter The analysis of the test papers has provided some suggestions Verb errors, noun errors, word order errors, article errors and prepositional errors are the five most frequent grammatical errors in students‟ writing Although the students are often reminded of correctness, appearance of MT interference errors in students‟ written English is frequent and systematic This may be taken as a proof of the negative effect of MT interference in foreign language learning process This study reveals that various errors made by the students and ranks the most frequent error category, which can serve as an indication for teachers to better understand what errors their students could make and provide suitable instructions thereby The study proves the great significance to EA as it helps teachers understand more about students‟ errors and the difficulties they are encounting to get over these errors While it is impossible to remove interference errors from the Vietnamese learners‟ English writing, it is quite logical to think that errors of this source will quantitatively be decreased with the increase of the learners‟ mastery of the TL The teacher of EFL writing should, therefore, expose students to lots of real or authentic writing, explain carefully the meanings and usage of new words and structures, and also teach them the target cultures To deal with interference errors, the teacher has to adopt the comparative techniques (L1L2) and provide reinforcement exercises of various types By creating a “natural” language teaching environment, the communicative language teaching together with the use of pair work and group work can help promote an effective process of learning the English language, particularly written English 43 Limitations of the study and suggestions for further studies Due to the limited time as well as the scope of the study, this study has not covered all errors found in the test papers and every aspect of Vietnamese interference in the English language In addition, this sudy just concentrates on words and stentence structrures Hence, more research needs implementing on the organization of ideas Motivation, language proficiency or gender of the learners may also be used to find out the relationship between errors and their influential factors Lexical errors and misspelling should be analyzed in detail to have better explanation for the cause Moreover, the emphasis of the researcher‟s study is on the interference of the L1, which hinders the L2 learning What is the role of the MT in L2 acqusition? This question may suggest a research topic of great interest 44 REFERENCES Tiếng Việt (in Vietnamese) Diệp Quang Ban Hoàng Văn Thung (2010) Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt Nxb Giáo Dục Viet Nam Nguyễn Đức Dân (1996) "Nhận diện thời gian tiếng Việt" Ngôn ngữ số 3 Cao Xuân Hạo (1998) "Về ý nghĩa "thì" "thể" tiếng Việt" Ngơn ngữ số Tiếng Anh (in English) Brown, G.A & Yule, G (1983) Teaching the Spoken Language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Brown, H.D., (1994) Principles of Language Learning and Teaching Third edition New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Regents Brown, H.D (2000) Cross-Linguistic influence and learner language In Principles of Language Learning and Teaching White plains: NY: Longman, 207-243 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 Byleen, E.(1986) Advanced Writing for Vietnamese ESL Students Journal of English Grammar on the Web, January 1997 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-nonNative conversations TESOL Quarterly 16/4:537-547 45 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 Education 16 Crystal, D (1987) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 17 CunningWorth, A (1987) Evaluation and Selecting EFL Teaching Materials London: Heinemann Education Book 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 University Press 22 Ellis, R (1997) Second Language Acquisition Oxford University Press, Oxford 23 Ellis, R (1995) Understanding Second Language Acquisition Oxford: Oxford University Press 24 Fisiak, J (1981) Some introductory notes concerning contrastive linguistics In J Fisiak (Ed.), Contrastive Linguistics Language Teacher (pp 1-13) Oxford:Pergamon press 25 George, H (1972) Common Errors in Language Learning, Newbury House Publishers, INC 26 Hughes, A & C Lascaratou (1982) Competing Criteria for Error Gravity ELT Journal 36/3: 175-82 27 Hughes, B and Tight, M (1996) How to Research Analyzing Data Open University Press Buckingham 173-2-6 46 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 Limited 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 : Oxford University Press 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 23/2 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 Kingdom: Longman 47 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 University Press 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 Languages London: Edward Arnold 46 Wilkins, D.A (1972) Linguistics in Language Teaching Edward Arnold I 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 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 (Internet/computer/television/radio ) - write about your most memorable thing in your life ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… II APPENDIX 2: DETAILS OF ERROR CLASSIFICATION Levels Substance Categories of errors Misspellings Lexical errors (morphology and Types of errors from the test papers Examples of errors Misspellings Many young people like listeninh to music on radio (listening) 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 Ø good or bad (be) Omission of past tense or past participle –ed Last summer, I spended my holidays in Sam Son (spent) Omission of plural-s There are many good programme on the television (programmes) addition of plural-s Computers can keep large amounts of informations in a small space (information) Word order Word order of noun modifiers I was born in a village small beside a river.(a small village) Articles Omission of articles There was Ø blocked door.(a) Addition and misuse of articles I don’t forget an event when I spent my holidays in Hue (the) Omission of prepositions Ø the morning, my mother usually gets up early to prepare breakfast (in) Addition of prepositions Watching TV can benefit for us if we make good use of it Misuse of prepositions We sat under the shade of a big tree to take a short rest (in) Adverbs Word form They were dancing and singing happy (happily) Adjectives Word form My mother often goes to bed lately (late) Conjunctions Misuse of conjunctions Although internet has some bad effects, but more and more people use it Pronouns Incorrect of personal pronouns Television helps we to learn more about the world.(us) Omission of pronouns Watching TV can benefit us if we make good use of Ø (it) Missing possessive Hanoi is special because of Ø historic features (its) syntax) TEXT ERRORS Nouns Preposition III APPENDIX 3: DETAILS OF ERROR CLASSIFICATION Levels Categories of errors Types of errors from the test papers Number of grammatical errors Interlingual Intralingual interference interference No % No Total % No Total Error rate No % % Misspellings Misspellings 197 9.3 Lexical errors Lexical errors 280 13.2 Grammar Verbs (morphology and syntax) Subject-verb agreement 187 Errors in the use of tenses 95 Infinitive “to”omission 45 Omission of verbs 68 24.0 Omission of past tense or past participle –ed Nouns Omission of plural-s 290 168 Word order Word order of noun modifiers Articles Omission of articles 247 15.0 84 5.1 Addition and misuse of articles Preposition Omission of prepositions 20 Addition of prepositions 3.2 41.7 685 32.3 302 18.4 302 14.2 247 15.0 247 11.7 179 10.9 179 8.4 17.7 10.2 addition of plural-s 685 134 8.2 0 95 5.8 3.5 110 6.7 110 5.2 Misuse of prepositions 29 49 Adverbs Word form 38 2.3 16 1.0 54 3.3 54 2.6 Adjectives Word form 18 1.1 12 0.7 30 1.8 30 1.4 Conjunctions Misuse of conjunctions 10 0.6 12 0.7 22 1.3 22 1.0 Pronouns Incorrect of personal pronouns 0.4 14 0.9 14 0.7 2120 100 2120 100 Missing possessive Total 1643 1019 0.5 61.9 624 ... WRITING SKILLS OF THE GRADE 10 STUDENTS AT TINH GIA UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL (ẢNH HƯỞNG CỦA TIẾNG MẸ ĐỐI VỚI KỸ NĂNG VIẾT CỦA HỌC SINH LỚP 10 TẠI TRƯỜNG THPT TĨNH GIA 2) M.A Minor Programme Thesis... 24 .0 29 0 17.7 Nouns 3 02 168 10. 2 134 8 .2 Word order 24 7 24 7 15.0 0 Articles 179 84 5.1 95 5.8 Preposition 110 53 3 .2 57 3.5 Adverbs 54 38 2. 3 16 1.0 Adjectives 30 18 1.1 12 0.7 Conjunctions 22 ... Misspellings 197 9.3% Articles 179 8.4% Preposition 110 5 .2% Adverbs 54 2. 6% Adjectives 30 1.4% 10 Conjunctions 22 1.0% 11 Pronouns 14 0.7% 21 20 100 % Total Table Total number of errors from the test