Errors Made by the Presenters of Thesis Proposal Seminar in English Study Program

This study is aimed to find out the types of errors made by the presenters of thesis proposal seminar based on Communicative Effect Taxonomy and to find out whether or not global errors of Communicative Effect Taxonomy made by the presenters of thesis proposal seminar significantly hinder communication between the presenters and the audiences. This study used qualitative approach since the data of this study was taken from 4 students' presentations which were in the form of words rather than number and statistic. This study revealed that there were 188 errors committed by the students in which 179 and 9 erroneous utterances fall under local error and global error respectively. The local errors consist of 45 lexical errors, 93 morphological errors, and 41 syntactical errors. The global errors consist of 2 wrong order of major constituents, 1 missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors, 1 missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors, and 5 uncategorized global errors. As for the effect of global error to the audience, the writer found out that the global errors did not significantly hinder communication to the audience.


INTRODUCTION
In Indonesia, English is a foreign language and is studied by Indonesian students from elementary school until university. Even though they have experienced a long-term process of learning, they are likely to still make errors. According to Dulay et al. (1 ´(UURUV DUH WKH IODZHG VLGH RI OHDUQHU VSHHFK RU ZULWLQJµ ,Q FRQGXFWLQJ D UHVHDUFK concerning errors, especially errors which are produced in speaking practice, the writer thinks it is important to make sure that the flaws that the speaker makes are errors not mistakes since speaking deals with nervousness. Someone tends to feel nervous speaking in front of audience and can result in producing mistakes. That is why to determine errors from mistakes is important. Corder (1974, cited in Ellis 1994 states that Error Analysis involves a set of procedures for identifying, describing, ad explaining errors in learner language. Related to this study, there are current studies which deal with error analysis. The first previous study was conducted by Sastra (2014) analyzing grammatical error on the spontaneous speech produced by students of English in 2014. The second research was conducted by Silitonga (2014) analyzing errors on story telling by participants of story telling competition in smart education center course. Irfani (2011) DQDO\VHV WHDFKHU·V FRUUHFWLRQ VWUDWHJLHV WRZDUGV VWXGHQWV· VSHDNLQJ errors.
From the previous researchers, only Silitonga (2014) who used specific method to determine errors and mistakes. In his research, he used a list RI TXHVWLRQV IRU WKH WHDFKHUV WR GHWHUPLQH WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV· understanding of English Grammar and how far their preparations are. As for this research, the writer did not carry out the same thing. To determine whether the flaws were errors or mistakes, the writer asked participants to recheck the transcriptions and asked them to self-correct the flaws. The flaws participants could not be self-corrected then were considered as errors.
In this study, the writer is interested in analyzing errors found on the eighth semester students of English Study Program at one of State Universities in East Java, Indonesia. The error analysis in this research focuses on Communicative Effect Taxonomy proposed by Dulay et al. (1982). This taxonomy focuses on the effect the errors have on the listener RU UHDGHU 'XOD\ HW DO DUJXH ´(UURUV WKDW DIIHFW WKH RYHUDOO organization of the sentence hinder successful communication, while errors that affect a single element of the sentence usually do not hinder FRPPXQLFDWLRQµ This taxonomy divides error into global and local. Global errors are the errors that affect overall sentence organization significantly hinder communication (Dulay, Burt, Krashen, 1982:191). Global errors consist of systematic types of errors such as wrong order of major constituents, missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors; missing cues to signal obligatory exceptions to pervasive syntactic rules; regularization of pervasive syntactic rules to exceptions. Local Errors are errors that affect single elements (constituents) in a sentence do not usually alter communication significantly (Dulay et al. 1982, p.191). For H[DPSOH WKH RPLVVLRQ RI ´Vµ LQ VHQWHQFH ´6KH UHDG D ERRNµ GRHV QRW significantly alter meaning and communication. The listener or reader can understand the intended meaning without any difficulty.
Since the classification of local errors is not described well in 'XOD\·V /DQJXDJH 7ZR WKH ZULWHU UHIHUUHG WR +HQGULFNVRQ·V -4) journal entitled ´(UURU $QDO\VLV DQG 6HOHFWLYH &RUUHFWLRQ in the Adult ESL &ODVVURRP $Q ([SHULPHQWµ to classify the local errors. The classifications were Lexical, Morphological, and Syntactic. The lexical subcategory covered misused or omitted nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. The morphological subcategory referred to misuse or omission of any bound morpheme. Syntactic subcategory included misused or omitted determiners, modals, qualifiers, prepositions, conjunctions, subordinators, sentence connectors, question words, and certain otherwise uncategorized syntactic classes (e.g., there is, it is).
The writer chooses eighth semester students of English Study Program at Faculty of Cultural Studies at one of State Universities in East Java, Indonesia as the subject of the study. The eighth semester students are chosen because as mentioned above, eighth semester students are expected to master English and are likely to make less error. Meanwhile, most of them are in the middle of writing their thesis. Thus, the writer chooses some of the students who are taking thesis and are going to present thesis proposal in semester eight this year. Thesis proposal presentation is chosen because from the writer's observation, students likely still make errors in presenting their proposals.

RESEARCH METHOD Research Design
In conducting this study, the writer used qualitative research approach. Qualitative approach was best used to conduct this study because according to Ary et al. (2002:425),qualitative research deals with the data in the form of words rather than number and statistic as in this study the data was taken from studentV· presentations which were in the form of words.
In this research, the writer classified the errors found in eighth VHPHVWHU VWXGHQWV· VSHHFK LQ SUHVHQWing thesis proposal based on Communicative Effect Taxonomy proposed by Dulay et al. (1982).

Data Source
The data of this research were the utterances of the presenters which contained errors in the thesis proposal seminar by the eighth semester students of English Study Program of Faculty of Cultural Studies at one of State Universities in East Java, Indonesia. Thesis proposal seminar is a seminar in which students present their thesis proposals in front of audience to get feedbacks for better researches. Thesis proposal is the first seminar of three seminars students need to pass to finish their studies. The three seminars are thesis proposal seminar, result seminar and the last is comprehension seminar.

Data Collection
There are some phases done in collecting the data as follows. 1. The writer asked the participants whether they were willing or not to be part of this research by giving them consent forms. 7KH ZULWHU DWWHQGHG WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV· WKHVLV SURSRVDO VHPLQDU DQG recorded the presentations. 3. The writer transcribed the recorded presentations by listening to the audio to make written form or transcript. The writer also asked a peer checker to recheck the transcripts to make sure that the transcripts were accurate. 4. The writer asked the presenters to recheck the transcripts to determine errors and mistakes. The writer listed the utterances containing errors the presenters cannot self-correct. The utterances containing errors will be used as the data of this research. 5. The writer asked two audiences from each seminar to be interviewed concerning their comprehension to the presentations. They were asked whether or not global errors which were found significantly hinder or alter communication. The result of the interview was used to answer the second problem of the study.

Data Analysis
Following Dulay et al. (1982), there are four criteria for descriptive classification of errors: Linguistic Taxonomy, Surface Strategy Taxonomy, Comparative Analysis Taxonomy, and Communicative Effect Taxonomy. For this research, the writer used Communicative Effect Taxonomy to classify the errors found.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Based on the Communicative Effect Taxonomy proposed by Dulay et al. (1982) the writer found some findings and described the result of the analysis from local and global error. The writer found there are 188 erroneous utterances committed by the students in which 179 and 9 erroneous utterances fall under local error and global error respectively. The local errors consist of 45 lexical errors, 93 morphological errors, and 41 syntactical errors. The global errors consist of 2 wrong order of major constituents, 1 missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors, 1 missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors, and 5 uncategorized global errors. Some of the erroneous utterances are presented and discussed below.

Local Errors
There are three subcategories for local errors, namely, Lexical, Morphological, and Syntactical errors.

Lexical Errors
The writer found 45 lexical errors in the HLJKW VHPHVWHU VWXGHQWV· presentations in the thesis seminar proposal. Lexical errors covered misused or omitted nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. One the errors is presented and discussed below. The presenter maintained his first language system in producing the SKUDVH ´VHPLQDU SURSRVDOµ In English, the modifier is put before the head while in Bahasa Indonesia is the opposite. The correct phrase should be ´SURSRVDO VHPLQDUµ.

Morphological Errors
The writer found 93 errors fall under morphological errors. Morphological errors referred to misuse or omission of any bound morpheme. One of the errors is presented and discussed below. In the narrative style magic realism happens when the characters of the story is first built as a normal life then continues to extraordinary life with some reasons.
The erroneous utterance above was made by the first presenter. The presenter violated the subject-verb agreement rule. It occured recursively. In English, a singular subject (she, he) takes a singular verb (is, runs), whereas a plural subject takes a plural verb. In the utterance above, the subject ´PDJLF UHDOLVPµ is singular so, the following verb should be singular. Therefore, the utterance should be ´,Q WKH QDUUDWLYH style, magic realism happens when the characters of the story is first built as a normal life then continues to extraordinary life with some reasonV µ

Syntactical Errors
The writer found 38 syntactical errors produced by the presenters. Syntactical errors included misused or omitted determiners, modals, qualifiers, prepositions, conjunctions, subordinators, sentence connectors, question words, and certain otherwise uncategorized syntactic classes (e.g., there is, it is). One of the errors is described and discussed below.

Table 3 Syntactical errors found in VWXGHQWV· SUHVHQWDWLRQV LQ WKH WKHVLV
proposal seminar Erroneous utterances Corrections Short story is short and brief fictional narrative prose. ,W·V shorter from novel. Short story is short and brief fictional narrative prose. ,W·V shorter than novel.
The use of preposition ´IURPµ is incorrect in the utterance above. Since it is a comparative degree sentence, the correct preposition should be ´WKDQµ It seems that the presenter maintained his first language system. In Bahasa Indonesia, to show comparison it uses ´OHELK GDUL µ. The writer translated the word ´GDULµ word for word into ´IURPµ.

Global Errors
From six global error classifications proposed by Dulay et al. (1982), the writer only found three categories namely, missing cues to signal obligatory exceptions to pervasive syntactic rules; missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors; and missing cues to signal obligatory exceptions to pervasive syntactic rules. In addition, the writer found some errors considered hinder communication but do not belong to any 'XOD\·V JOREDO HUURU FODVVLILFDWLRQ 7KH ZULWHU DOVR IRXQG HUURUV WKDW ZHUH considered as global errors by the expert. The writer then classified those errors as uncategorized global errors. All those errors are presented and discussed below.

Erroneous utterances
Corrections Defocalization I use because in my opinion every story, every narrative prose use their point of view of narrator.
I use defocalization because in my opinion every story, every narrative prose uses point of view of the narrator.
In the utterance on the table above, the presenter violated the SVO order. The presenter maintained his first language system in producing English. In Bahasa Indonesia, it is common to put object before predicate (eg. ´%XNX LQL VD\D EDZDµ). However, In English, native speakers are persistent to maintain the SVO order. I said not only western people but also modern people.
The use of correlative conjunction in the utterance above is incorrect. Correlative conjunction connects equal sentence elements together (eg. two nouns) and is always composed by two words. The utterance above creates ambiguity. The listener can interpret that the presenter probably said that he did not say ´QRW RQO\ ZHVWHUQ SHRSOHµ but he said ´PRGHUQ SHRSOHµ. The correct utterances should be ´, VDLG QRW RQO\ western people but also PRGHUQ SHRSOH µ Defocalization isused in magic realism narrative text because this style has itsown way to see the perspective of the narrator toward the story.
The utterance on the table can hardly be comprehended. The presenter violated the SVO order. So, to make the utterance comprehensible, be + past participle (+by) should be inserted. Therefore, the more comprehensible sentence should be ´'HIRFDOL]DWLRQ is used (by the author) in magic realism narrative text because this style has its own way to see WKH SHUVSHFWLYH RI WKH QDUUDWRU WRZDUG WKH VWRU\ µ

Uncategorized Global Errors
The writer found errors which considered as global errors. However those are do not belong to any Dulay et al. (1982) classification. Thus, the writer classified those errors into uncategorized global errors. Below is one of the uncategorized global errors.

Erroneous utterances
Corrections ,W·V mean that in magical realism there are two perspectives.
It means that in magical realism there are two perspectives.
The auxiliary verb ´LVµ is a small linguistic part of the sentence but changed the overall meaning of the sentences above. The auxiliary ´LVµ indicates that the word ´PHDQµ in the sentences above can work as an adjective or noun. In Oxford dictionary, the word ´PHDQµ as an adjective means unkind, spiteful, or unfair. In the untterance above it can be interpreted ´,W·V unfair that in magical realism there are two SHUVSHFWLYHV µ Thus, the utterance was considered alter the meaning of the sentence.
Since Communicative Effect Taxonomy does not only deal with errors but also the effect to the listener, the writer interviewed the audience to inquire their comprehension toward the presentations and KRZ WKH JOREDO HUURUV SURGXFHG E\ WKH SUHVHQWHUV DIIHFW DXGLHQFHV· comprehension. This was mainly conducted to answer the second problem of the study.
From the four participants, the writer only found significant global errors in the first presenter utterances. Therefore, the writer only LQWHUYLHZHG WZR DXGLHQFHV ZKR DWWHQGHG WKH ILUVW SUHVHQWHU·V VHPLQDU The interview was brief. The writer pointed out the global errors to the audiences. They were asked whether the utterances were correct or not. Then they were asked to interpret the meaning. The audiences found no difficulties in intepreting the intended meaning of the utteranced considered as global errors. Perhaps, this is caused by the first language system the presenter and audiences both have. The audiences noticed that those utterances were grammatically incorrect though. They could even provide corrections.
Thus, the writer sums up that global errors made by the presenter do not significantly hinder communication to the audiences, perhaps due to the same knowledge they shared.

CONCLUSIONS
,Q WKLV UHVHDUFK WKH ZULWHU XVHG SUHVHQWHUV· XWWHUDQFHV RI WKHVLV proposal seminar of Faculty of Cultural Study at one of State Universities in East Java, Indonesia as the object of this research. The writer used Communicative Effect Taxonomy proposed by Dulay et al (1982) to categorize and analyze the errors.
The writer found there are 188 erroneous utterances committed by the students in which 179 and 9 erroneous utterances fall under local error and global error respectively. The local errors consist of 45 lexical errors, 93 morphological errors, and 41 syntactical errors. The global errors consist of 2 Wrong order of major constituents, 1 missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors, 1 missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors, and 5 uncategorized global errors. The writer also found that the global errors did not significantly hinder communication between the presenters and the audiences.