(Luận văn thạc sĩ) active and passive participial adjectives in english errors commonly made by students at lang son technical economic secondary school and some proposed solutions

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST -GRADUATE STUDIES
****************************************

HOÀNG THỊ HẢI

ACTIVE AND PASSIVE PARTICIPIAL ADJECTIVES IN NGLISH:
ERRORS COMMONLY MADE BY STUDENTS AT LANG SON
TECHNICAL&ECONOMIC SECONDARY SCHOOL
AND SOME PROPOSED SOLUTIONS.

(Tính từ chủ động và bị động có nguồn gốc phân từ trong tiếng
Anh: Những lỗi học sinh Trường Trung cấp Kinh tế- Kỹ thuật
Lạng sơn thường mắc và một vài giải pháp đề xuất)

M.A. MINOR THESIS

Field: EnglishTeaching Methodology
Code: 60 14 10

Hanoi-2011


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST -GRADUATE STUDIES
****************************************

HOÀNG THỊ HẢI

ACTIVE AND PASSIVE PARTICIPIAL ADJECTIVES IN NGLISH:
ERRORS COMMONLY MADE BY STUDENTS AT LANG SON
TECHNICAL&ECONOMIC SECONDARY SCHOOL
AND SOME PROPOSED SOLUTIONS.

(Tính từ chủ động và bị động có nguồn gốc phân từ trong
tiếng Anh: Những lỗi học sinh Trường Trung cấp Kinh tếKỹ thuật Lạng sơn thường mắc và một vài giải pháp đề xuất)

M.A. MINOR THESIS

Field: EnglishTeaching Methodology
Code: 60 14 10
SUPERVISOR: Assoc. Prof. Dr. VÕ ĐẠI QUANG

Hanoi-2011


iii

ABSTrACT

This research aimed to discover common errors made by students in using English
Participial Adjectives. The participants of the study were 100 the first-year students (aged 1830). They are from classes K29A1, K29A5, Business Accounting of Lang Son Technical &
Economic Secondary school in the school year 2009 / 2010. The instrumentations used to
collect data in this study are written grammar test and student interview. Numbers and causes
of common errors were identified, calculated, and compared in terms of error types.
The study shows the six most common errors in students’ performance as follows:
Errors in Participial Adjectives formation (29.4%); Errors in the use of -ing and -ed
Participial Adjectives (31.3%); Failure to identify errors in the use Participial Adjectives
(39.5%); Errors in the choice of -ing and -ed Participial Adjectives (47.5%); Errors in

sentence transformation (46.7%); Errors in Vietnamese -English translation: Incorrect
translation (46.9%)
Based on the findings of the study, some possible solutions to students’ errors in using
English Participial Adjectives were worked out. Recommendations for further study are also
included.


iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
E.g.

For example

E.P.Adjs

English Participial Adjectives

P.Adjs

Participial Adjectives

SVC

Subject + Verb + complement

SVOC

Subject + Verb + Object + complement

L1

First language

L2

Second language


v

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 3.1

Errors in word formation (p.24)

Table 3.2

Errors in the use of -ing and -ed P.Adjs. (p.26)

Table 3.3

Failure to identify the wrong use of -ing and -ed P.Adjs (p.270

Table 3.4

Incorrect choice of -ing and -ed P.Adjs (p.29)

Table 3.5

Errors in sentence transformation (p.30)

Table 3.6

Errors in Vietnamese -English translation (p.320

Figure 3.1

Difference between two groups of students in giving wrong answers to
exercise 1 (p.25)

Figure 3.2

Difference between two groups of students in giving wrong answer to
exercise 2 (p.27)

Figure 3. 3

Difference between two groups of students in failing to identify the wrong
use of -ing and -ed P.Adjs in exercise 3 (p.28)

Figure 3.4:

Difference in perceiving and (differentiating -ing P.Adjs from -ed Adjs of
students of group 1 and group 2. (p.31)

Figure 3.5

Difference between two groups of students in giving wrong answers to
exercise 5 (p.31)

Figure 3.6

Difference between two groups of students in giving wrong answers to
exercise 6 (p.33)


vi

GLOSSARY OF LINGUISTIC TERMS
Code

The systems (grammar, meaning and sound) of a language.

Error

A systematic deviation from the accepted code.

Global error

An error which affects the meaning of the whole sentence.

Local error

An error which only affects the meaning of the clause in which it is
found.

L1 transfer

Use of what the learner knows about his first language to try and

assist expression in the target language.

Interference

The effects of ‘habit’ formed in the speaker’s first language acting

from L1

upon the target language. (This is the phenomenon of borrowing
and transferring learner’s native language patterns into the target
language).

Target language

The language which the learner is learning.

Over-

A failure by the learner to apply restrictions where appropriate to

generalisation

the application of a rule. (It is learners’ previous mother tongue
experience that is considered as a means of organizing the second
language data.)

L1

First language (usually the mother tongue).

Ignorance of

The second language learners “fail to observe the restrictions of

rule restrictions

existing structures’’.

Intralingual

are those which reflect the general characteristics of rule learning.

errors
Developmental

are those which illustrate the learner’s attempting to build

errors

hypotheses about English language from his limited related
experience.


vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration

p.i

Acknowledgements

ii

Abstract

iii

List of abbreviations

iv

List of tables and figures

v

Glossary of linguistic terms

vi

Table of contents

vii

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1

1. Rationale of the study

1

2. Aims and objectives of the study

1

2.1. Aims of the study

1

2.2. Objectives of the study

1

3. Scope of the study

2

4. Significance of the study

2

5. Organization of the thesis

2

PART B: DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 1: Literature Review

3

3

1.1. An investigation into English Participial Adjectives

3

1.1.1. The formation of the Participial Adjectives

3

1.1.1.1. The definition of the participles

3

1.1.1.2. Participial Adjectives

3

1.1.2.. Syntactic functions of Participial Adjectives

6

1.1.2.1. Attributive

6

1.1.2.2. Predicative

7

1.1.3. Semantic features of Participial Adjectives

9

1.1.3.1. Stative / Dynamic

9


viii

1.1.3.2. Gradable

10

1.1.4. Participial Adjectives in collocation with nouns

11

1.2. The meaning of Participial Adjectives compared with their Vietnamese equivalents

13

1.2.1. The meaning of Participial Adjectives rendered into Vietnamese

13

1.2.2. The choice of -ing and -ed Participial Adjectives in English

13

1.3. Error and Error Analysis

14

1.3.1. What is “error”?

15

1.3.2. What is “error analysis”?

15

1.3.3. Classification of errors

15

1.3.4. Possible causes of errors in second language learning

15

1.3.4.1. Overgeneralization in learning and using E.P.Adjs

17

1.3.4.2. Developmental errors

17

1.3.4.3. Teaching - induced errors

17

1.3.4.4. Language transfer

18

1.4. Summary

18

Chapter 2: Research Methodology

19

2.1. The context of the study
2. Participants and their background
2.3. Research method
2.3.1. Research questions
2.3.2. Instrumentation
2.3.2.1. Test
2.3.2.2. Interview
2.2.4. Data collection procedures
2.2.4.1. Data collection
2.2.4.2. Techniques of analysis
2.3. Summary

20
20
20

21
21
22
22
22
22
23
23


ix

Chapter 3: The

Study

3.1. Some actual errors that students at Lang Son Technical & Economic Secondary
school commit when using E.P.Adjs

24

3.1.1. Errors in Participial Adjectives formation

24

3.1.2. Errors in the use of -ing and -ed Participial Adjectives

25

3.1.3. Failure to identify errors in the use Participial Adjectives

27

3.1.4. Errors in the choice of -ing and -ed Participial Adjectives

28

3.1.5. Errors in sentence transformation

30

3.1.6. Errors in Vietnamese -English translation

31

3.2 Findings and Discussion

33

3.3. Summary

35

Chapter 4: Possible solutions to the students’ errors in
using English Participial Adjectives
4.1. Possible solutions to the errors commonly made by students at Lang Son Technical
&Economic Secondary school

36

4.2. Suggestions for teaching and learning Participial Adjectives in English

36

4.2.1. Suggestions for teaching

36

4.2.2. Suggestions for learning

36

4.3. Summary

38

PART C: CONCLUSION
1. Conclusion

39

2. Recommendations for further research

40

References

41

Appendices

Appendix 1: Written grammar test

I

Appendix 2: Answer key

I
IV


BẢN TOÁT YẾU LUẬN VĂN
Tên luân văn: “Active and Passive Participial Adjectives in English: Errors
commonly made by students at Lang Son Technical & Economic Secondary school
and some proposed solutions.”

(Tính từ chủ động và bị động có nguồn gốc phân từ trong tiếng Anh:
Những lỗi học sinh Trường Trung cấp Kinh tế- Kỹ thuật Lạng sơn
thường mắc và một vài giải pháp đề xuất)
Người thực hiện: Hoàng Thị Hải: Cao học K18A dự án phát triển giáo viên
Người hướng dẫn: PGS.TS Võ Đại Quang
This research aimed to discover common errors made by students in
using English Participial Adjectives. The participants of the study were 100
the first-year students (aged 18-30). They are from classes K29A1, K29A5,
Business Accounting of Lang Son Technical & Economic Secondary school
in the school year 2009 / 2010. The instrumentations used to collect data in
this study are written grammar test and student interview. Numbers and
causes of common errors were identified, calculated, and compared in terms
of error types.
The study shows the six most common errors in students’ performance
as follows: Errors in Participial Adjectives formation (29.4%); Errors in the

use of -ing and -ed Participial Adjectives (31.3%); Failure to identify errors
in the use Participial Adjectives (39.5%); Errors in the choice of -ing and -ed
Participial Adjectives (47.5%); Errors in sentence transformation (46.7%);
Errors in Vietnamese -English translation: Incorrect translation (46.9%)


Based on the findings of the study, some possible solutions to students’
errors

in

using

English

Participial

Adjectives

were

worked

out.

Recommendations for further study are also included.
Nghiên cứu này nhằm mục đích tìm ra những lỗi thơng thường mà học
sinh thường mắc trong q trình sử dụng tính động từ có nguồn gốc phân từ
trong tiếng Anh. Nghiên cứu này được khảo sát trên 100 học sinh năm thứ
nhất ( tuổi từ 18-30) lớp K29 A1 và K29A5 chuyên ngành kế toán doanh

nghiệp tại trường Trung Cấp Kinh tế - Kỹ thuật Lạng Sơn năm học 20092010) Công cụ dung để nghiên cứu là thu thập dữ liệu từ phiếu điều tra từ bài
kiểm tra viết ngữ pháp và phỏng vấn học sinh. Nghiên cứu này đã xác định
được, tính tốn và so sánh một số loại lỗi, con số, và ngun nhân gây ra
những lỗi thơng thường đó.
Nghiên cứu này chỉ ra sáu lỗi học sinh thường mắc trong q trình học
như sau: Lỗi trong thành lập tính từ có nguồn gốc phân từ (29.4%); Lỗi trong
sử dụng tính động từ có đi ing và ed ( 31.3 %); Khơng xác định đựoc lỗi
tính động từ ( 39.5%); lỗi trong lựa chọn tính từ có đi ing và ed ( 47.5%);
Lỗi trong chuyển câu ( 46.7%); lỗi trong khi dịch từ tiếng Việt sang tiếng Anh
(46.9%).
Dựa vào kết quả nghiên cứu tác giả đã gợi ý được một số đề xuất giải
pháp về lỗi của học sinh trong khi sử dụng tính động từ có nguồn gốc phân từ
trong tiếng Anh và đưa ra một số khuyến nghị cho nghiên cứu tiếp theo.



Thank you for evaluating AnyBizSoft PDF
Merger! To remove this page, please
register your program!
Go to Purchase Now>>

AnyBizSoft

PDF Merger
 Merge multiple PDF files into one
 Select page range of PDF to merge

 Select specific page(s) to merge
 Extract page(s) from different PDF
files and merge into one