Abstract
It is a known fact that the English language has established itself firmly in Nigeria, its importance therefore, cannot be over emphasized. Students with learning glitches are exasperated in their efforts at written expression because of problems with the mechanical accuracy aspects of writing. Problems with spelling, punctuation, and handwriting may draw attention away from the writer's focus on ideas. A teacher, therefore, needs effective ways of assisting students in overcoming the mechanical obstacles to writing. A total of 200 (two hundred) senior secondary school students were selected for the study which adopted S.P. Corder's approach on Error Analysis (EA). The result showed that most of the students had problems in the areas of spellings; punctuation errors and capitalization errors. The study recommended, among others, that teachers should adopt effective methods for helping students with learning problems overcome the mechanical obstacles to writing.
Introduction
Error analysis as an approach in language study has aroused the interest of several scholars because of its importance. According to Vahdatinejad (2008) error analysis can be imparted and it offers the essential data concern whatever is deficient in the student's capability. Vahdatinejad makes a difference among errors and lapses. He said, lapses are made also by indigenous users, and could be fixed by those who make them. On the spot rectification is recommended instead of remediation which is needed for errors. Olasehinde (2002) agrees that making errors by learners is unavoidable. He also suggested that errors are inevitable and an essential part of the scholarship curve.
Mitchell and Myles (2004) claim that errors, if learned, can divulge an evolving structure of the student's second language and this structure is active and exposed to variations and reorganizing of limitations. This opinion is maintained by Stark's (2001) research, which reveals that instructors have to see students' errors confidently. Teachers ought not to take errors as the students' inefficiency to comprehend the rubrics and constructions but rather as a procedure to learning. Stark, keys to the notion that errors are usual and unavoidable characteristics of learning and are therefore an essential condition of learning.
Mitchell and Myles (2004) claim that errors, if learned, can divulge an evolving structure of the student's second language and this structure is active and exposed to variations and reorganizing of limitations. This opinion is maintained by Stark's (2001) research, which reveals that instructors have to see students' errors confidently. Teachers ought not to take errors as the students' inefficiency to comprehend the rubrics and constructions but rather as a procedure to learning. Stark, keys to the notion that errors are usual and unavoidable characteristics of learning and are therefore an essential condition of learning.
Content
In a study by Sarfraz, (2011) to examine the errors produced by fifty Pakistani students in essay writing, the research revealed that the widely held errors are caused by mother tongue interference. Darus and Subramanian (2009), with Corder ideal on error examination, scrutinized errors in seventy-two written essays by seventy-two Malaysian learners. It was discovered that the learners' errors existed in areas of the singular and plural forms of verbs, verbal tense, word-choices, prepositional, concord and word arrangement.
Abisamra (2003) examined examples of work written and collected from ten learners in class nine in an Arabic speaking community and categorized the written errors in 5 groups, viz., syntactic (prepositionals, articles, adjectivals, etc.); grammar (co-ordination, sentence pattern, word-order etc.); vocabulary (word choice), semantic and constituent (punctuations, capitalizations, and spellings); and dialogue errors. The outcomes showed that 1/3rd of the learners' errors revealed transferral errors from the indigenous language, and the utmost figures of errors existed in the classes of meaning and lexical. The remaining errors (64.1%) point to errors on over-generalization. In a similar study, Sawalmeh (2013) also investigated 32 Arabic-speaking Saudi learners of English and he identified 10 general errors, namely errors of verbs usage, words arrangement, singular and plural formation, concord, dual negations, spelling, capitalisation, article, structure breakage and prepositionals. The result of the study revealed that the highest frequency of errors was on verb tense. He concluded by saying that "most of the errors can be due to L₁ transfer" (p. 14).
Abisamra (2003) examined examples of work written and collected from ten learners in class nine in an Arabic speaking community and categorized the written errors in 5 groups, viz., syntactic (prepositionals, articles, adjectivals, etc.); grammar (co-ordination, sentence pattern, word-order etc.); vocabulary (word choice), semantic and constituent (punctuations, capitalizations, and spellings); and dialogue errors. The outcomes showed that 1/3rd of the learners' errors revealed transferral errors from the indigenous language, and the utmost figures of errors existed in the classes of meaning and lexical. The remaining errors (64.1%) point to errors on over-generalization. In a similar study, Sawalmeh (2013) also investigated 32 Arabic-speaking Saudi learners of English and he identified 10 general errors, namely errors of verbs usage, words arrangement, singular and plural formation, concord, dual negations, spelling, capitalisation, article, structure breakage and prepositionals. The result of the study revealed that the highest frequency of errors was on verb tense. He concluded by saying that "most of the errors can be due to L₁ transfer" (p. 14).
Conclusion
The improvement of language teaching depends on learners' awareness to the learning process. The process of committing errors is the process of foreign language acquisition and the language rules. And error analysis tries to discover and sum up some rules in language learning by analyzing learners’ errors just as we did in this paper. The theory of error analysis, on the one hand, helps teachers understand the students' difficulties in learning, study the causes of their errors, and take effective measures to correct the errors. On the other hand, the theory will press teachers to adjust teaching strategy, teaching means, and develop teaching level wholly. Generally, the most dominant mechanical errors in the students' composition appear to be error in spelling, punctuation, and capitalization. The poor use of these tripartite aspects goes to show that most of the students were still at their primary stages of acquisition, and that there was still more to be done.
References
Abisamra, N. (2003). An analysis oferrors in Arabic speakers' English writing.
In Mourtaga, K. (ed.). Investigating writing problems among Palestinian
students studying English as a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. Qatar University. Retrieved from http://abisamra03.tripod.com/nada/languageacq-erroranalysis.html.
Accessed 15th Nov.,2015.
Aronoff, M. & Fudeman, K. (2005). What is Morphology? Fundamentals of
Linguistics University of Malaysia International Journal of Humanities
and Social Science vol. 3 No. 11.
Babatunde, S.T. (2002). "The state of the English Language in Nigeria" In
Adebayo, L.L Longo Abanihe 1 and Obia 1 (eds).
Brown, H. D. (2002). Principles of Language Learning (4th edition) London:
Longman.
Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Darus, S. & Subramaniam, K. (2009). Error analysis of the written English essays
of secondary school students in Malaysia. European Journal of Social
Sciences, 8(3) 483-495.
Eka, D. (2004). Elements of grammar and mechanics of English. Uyo: Samuf
Educational limited.
Ferris, D. (2002). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Fromkin, V. Rodman, R. and Hyms, N. (2003). An introduction to language.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Mitchell, R. & Myles, M. (2004). Second language learning theories. New York:
Hodder Arnold.
Olasehinde, M.O. (2002). Error analysis and remedial pedagogy. In S.T
Babatunde. and D.S. Adeyanju (Eds.). Language meaning and society.
Illorin: Itaytee Press and Publishing
Ridha, N. (2012). The effect of EFL learners' mother tongue on their writings in English: An error analysis study. Journal of the College of Arts.
University of Basrah, 60, 22-45.
Sarfraz, S. (2011). Errors analysis of the written essays of Pakistani undergraduate students: A case study. Asian Transaction on Basie and Applied Sciences. 1(3): 29-35. Sawalmeh, M.H.M. (2013). Error analysis of written English essays: The case of students of the preparatory year programme in Saudi Arabia. English for specific purpose, 14(40): 1-17.
Stark, L. (2001). Analysing the interlanguage of American SIGN language
natives. Newark: University of Dalaware.
Vahdatinejad, S. (2008). Students' error analysis and attitude towards teacher feedback using a selected software: A case study. Unpublished Masters' thesis, University of Kebangsaan, Malaysia, Bangi.
In Mourtaga, K. (ed.). Investigating writing problems among Palestinian
students studying English as a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. Qatar University. Retrieved from http://abisamra03.tripod.com/nada/languageacq-erroranalysis.html.
Accessed 15th Nov.,2015.
Aronoff, M. & Fudeman, K. (2005). What is Morphology? Fundamentals of
Linguistics University of Malaysia International Journal of Humanities
and Social Science vol. 3 No. 11.
Babatunde, S.T. (2002). "The state of the English Language in Nigeria" In
Adebayo, L.L Longo Abanihe 1 and Obia 1 (eds).
Brown, H. D. (2002). Principles of Language Learning (4th edition) London:
Longman.
Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Darus, S. & Subramaniam, K. (2009). Error analysis of the written English essays
of secondary school students in Malaysia. European Journal of Social
Sciences, 8(3) 483-495.
Eka, D. (2004). Elements of grammar and mechanics of English. Uyo: Samuf
Educational limited.
Ferris, D. (2002). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Fromkin, V. Rodman, R. and Hyms, N. (2003). An introduction to language.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Mitchell, R. & Myles, M. (2004). Second language learning theories. New York:
Hodder Arnold.
Olasehinde, M.O. (2002). Error analysis and remedial pedagogy. In S.T
Babatunde. and D.S. Adeyanju (Eds.). Language meaning and society.
Illorin: Itaytee Press and Publishing
Ridha, N. (2012). The effect of EFL learners' mother tongue on their writings in English: An error analysis study. Journal of the College of Arts.
University of Basrah, 60, 22-45.
Sarfraz, S. (2011). Errors analysis of the written essays of Pakistani undergraduate students: A case study. Asian Transaction on Basie and Applied Sciences. 1(3): 29-35. Sawalmeh, M.H.M. (2013). Error analysis of written English essays: The case of students of the preparatory year programme in Saudi Arabia. English for specific purpose, 14(40): 1-17.
Stark, L. (2001). Analysing the interlanguage of American SIGN language
natives. Newark: University of Dalaware.
Vahdatinejad, S. (2008). Students' error analysis and attitude towards teacher feedback using a selected software: A case study. Unpublished Masters' thesis, University of Kebangsaan, Malaysia, Bangi.