Steps Of Error Analysis

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

The research we carried out is based on the error analysis of written works made by Slovak primary pupils who learn English as a foreign language. Our aim was to find out the areas of English grammar which are the most difficult for them, i.e. where they made errors, what types of errors they made, what was the frequency of occurrence of each type of errors and what were the causes of appearance of errors.

2.1.1.1 Research Question

We formulated the major research question which follows the aim of our research. The research question was: What areas of English grammar are the most difficult for Slovak primary pupils?

2.1.1.2 Research Hypothesis

Following the research question we formulated a research hypothesis and we verified this one in our research. The hypothesis was formulated as follows: We suppose that the use of verb forms, verb tenses and prepositions are the most difficult areas of English grammar for participants in our research.

We suggested this hypothesis because we had been inspired by information from Slovak teachers of English. According to them these areas of English grammar are often a big problem for Slovak learners.

2.1.2 Place and Participants of Research

The participants of our research were 14 years old Slovak pupils of the 9th grade at primary school (Základná škola s materskou školou, Dolná Trnovská 36, Žilina) in the school year 2012/2013. The total number of our participants was twenty-three pupils, i.e. the complete class. We chose them to be subject of our research because we supposed that they had already learnt English grammar much more than pupils of lower grades.

2.1.3 Instrument of Research

The instrument of our research was written outputs made by the primary pupils which we applied as the data to be analysed and described the errors made by the learners. We prepared a written exercise (i.e. a set of twenty sentences in Slovak language) and the pupils should rewrite the ones into English by using correct grammar. Sentence structure, vocabulary as well as grammar which were used in the sentences matched the requirements of difficulty according to established curriculum for primary pupils of the 8th grade in Slovakia. Each pupil had both the same assignment (twenty sentences) and the time interval (thirty minutes) for writing. They had a chance for self-correction after writing. This form of grammar testing belongs among conventional methods and this one is also successfully used in Slovak schools to this day. The data were collected in October 2012 (during our pedagogical practice at this primary school). The set of sentences including the correct answers are illustrated as appendices 1 and 2.

2.1.4 Research Method

In our research we used Error Analysis (EA) as one of the research methods. We inspired by linguist Corder and his steps of EA which summarized Ellis and Barkhiuzen (2005) in their work.

Steps of Error Analysis:

1. Collection of samples of learner language (i.e. the decision what outputs of the learner’s language can be used for the analysis and how to collect the data).

2. Identification of errors (i.e. the way of identifying the errors, e.g. by underlying the errors and using the symbols of correcting code).

3. Classification of errors (i.e. the errors can be categorized into groups which are stated according to their origin and presence).

4. Explanation of errors (i.e. the calculating and explaining the errors in a suitable way).

5. Error evaluation (i.e. this step involves the interpretation of tables, graphs and conclusions).

Taking these steps into consideration we proceeded as follows:

Firstly, we tried to identify the errors which primary pupils made in their written outputs. The errors were highlighted and marked with symbols of correction code.

Secondly, we had to classify the errors from a linguistic point of view into some categories according to their linguistic origin. We also used linguistic taxonomy which is called Surface Strategy Taxonomy (SST) by authors Dulay et al. (1982). This taxonomy was useful for organization and description of collected data. There are four types of errors (omission, addition, misformation and misordering) which form the entity of SST. This taxonomy highlights the way surface structures are altered.

The next step which we carried out was the calculation of the errors. We found

out the number of errors in each group and we also calculated their percentages. By calculating the frequency of each error we were able to determine the most frequent errors which primary pupils made. In our research we used the following mathematical formula:

E%x 100%

E% = percentage of each error

gx = total number of the concrete error

= total number of all errors

Lastly, we sorted and arranged results of the analysis in the form of tables and graphs for each category of errors. We also described in detail each type of errors within each category of errors.

The findings of our research are mentioned in a separate part of this work which is called Results of Research. Using the results of our research we were able to formulate research conclusions and some suggestions for improving of existing pedagogical practice.

2.2 Results of Research

Our research was realized according to the methodology which had been described in the previous chapters. We analysed twenty-three written outputs made by Slovak primary pupils. There were found out one hundred and forty-free errors of various kinds and they were marked with correction codes and categorized into eight categories.

Tab. 1 List of Correction Codes

Symbol

Kind of Error

AR

Article (a / an / the)

PREP

Preposition

VF

Verb Form

PRON

Pronoun

SP

Spelling

NU

Number (singular / plural)

WO

Word Order

VT

Verb Tense

S / V

Subject / Verb Agreement

In the other words, we took morphological and syntactic point of view into consideration when we were dividing errors into categories.

We tabellized the results of the analysis as follows:

Tab. 2 Structure of Errors

Categories of Errors

Number of Errors

Percentage

Errors in the use of verb forms

49

34,2

Errors in the use of verb tenses

25

17,5

Errors in the use of articles

21

14,7

Word order errors

18

12,6

Errors in the use of prepositions

10

7,0

Spelling errors

9

6,3

Errors in the use of pronouns

6

4,2

Errors in the use of plural nouns

5

3,5

TOTAL

143

100,0

The structure of the errors was also summarized and presented in percentages according to the frequency of their appearance in the picture 1.

Two copies of primary pupils’ works are illustrated as appendices 3 and 4. The data in the table 1 and picture 1 shows which areas of English language including grammar were the most difficult for Slovak primary pupils in our research, i.e. where they made errors and how many errors they made. Following the aim of our research we analysed each category of errors in the next parts of this work. We also tried to describe what types of errors within the each category primary pupils made and to explain the causes of appearance of these errors. The frequency of occurrence of each type of errors was mentioned too.

2.2.1 Errors in the Use of Verb Forms

There were the most errors in the use of verbs in our research. Therefore we divided them into following categories:

1. Errors in the use of verb forms

2. Errors in the use of verb tenses

Each category was analysed separately. We recognize several verb forms in English. EFL learners have to know to use verb forms correctly. This area of English was also analysed and evaluated in our research. Our findings showed that verb forms had been the most difficult part of English grammar for them. We found out forty-nine errors (34,2 %) of all errors which learners had made in the use of verb forms. Using SST by Dulay et al. (1982) we divided these errors into the following groups:

1. omission of items within the verb forms = 6 errors (12,2 %)

2. addition of items within the verb forms = 12 errors (24,4 %)

3. misformation of verb forms = 31 errors (63,4 %)

2.2.1.1 Omission of Items within the Verb Forms

This type of error was made by six primary pupils (12,2 %) in the sentence:

11. How many foreign countries have you visited? (Primary pupils used verb form visit instead of visited in the sentence: How many foreign countries have you visit?)

They used correct verb tense (present perfect) in the sentence but the verb form of the main verb visit had been used incorrectly. They omitted marker –ed when they had formed past participle of the verb visit.

2.2.1.2 Addition of Items within the Verb Forms

We identified twelve errors (24,4 %) when primary pupils had added some redundant elements in their sentences. They made following errors:

02. He read an interesting book. (Six primary pupils used the verb form readed instead of read in the sentence: He readed an interesting book.)

They formed past tense of the verb read by adding –ed to the base form. It was an incorrect procedure because they should use simple past form of the verb read.

10. Could she lend me some money? (Five primary pupils used lends instead of lend in the sentence: Could she lends me some money?)

Using the third person singular morpheme –s they made the error. We always use a modal auxiliary verb with a main verb which is the bare infinitive (i.e. without morpheme –s which is typical for the third person in singular).

20. Will you help me? (Only one primary pupil made an error when he/she had tried to combine two forms of future tenses together in the sentence: Will you going to help me?)

He/She used going to construction excessively in this sentence.

2.2.1.3 Misformation of Verb Forms

We identified seven sentences in our research where primary pupils had used wrong forms of verbs. The total number of these errors was thirty-one (63,4 % of all errors). It was the most numerous type of errors in our research. These errors were found out in the sentences:

02. He read an interesting book. (They used form red instead of read in the sentence: He red an interesting book.)

This error was made by five primary pupils. They used written verb form which did not exist in English. We pronounce past participle verb read as /red/.

05. I have never drunk Japanese tea. (Seven primary pupils used past simple verb form drank instead of past participle verb form drunk in the sentence: I have never drank Japanese tea.)

We pronounce past participle verb form drunk as /drʌŋk/.

07. Some people are afraid of mice. (Three primary pupils made an error when they had used verb form is instead of verb form are in the sentence: Some people is afraid of mice.)

They did not respect the rule subject and verb agreement because they had used verb form is with plural noun people. On the other words, the plural subject takes the plural verb.

10. Could she lend me some money? (Six primary pupils used the wrong form of a main verb because they had used the verb borrow instead of lend in the sentence: Could she borrow me some money?)

Probably, they were not aware of the meaning of the verb borrow because this word means ‘to take’ while lend means ‘to give’.

16. Have you ever broken a mirror? (Five primary pupils used past simple verb form broke instead of past participle verb form broken in the sentence: Have you ever broke a mirror?)

They tried to use the correct verb tense (present perfect) but the verb form broke had been incorrect.

17. My sister is not living with us now. (Two primary pupils used the verb to do, i.e. third person singular verb form does instead of the verb to be, i.e. is in the sentence: My sister does not living with us now.)

However primary pupils tried to use present continuous by using present participle of the main verb living they had also used the wrong verb form of the present tense to do (does instead of is).

19. How is this word written? (Three primary pupils used wrong verb form writted which does not exist in English instead of past participle verb form written).

They wanted to form the past participle verb form by adding –ed to the main verb.

2.2.2 Errors in the Use of Verb Tenses

Errors in the use of verb tenses point to the learner’s incapability to make a decision which verb tense should be used and to use the correct verb tense. These errors are often combined with verb form errors and we can say that they often overlap each other. Error Analysis in our research showed twenty-five errors in this category (i.e. 17,5 % of all errors). In the other words, primary pupils made these errors because they had used wrong verb tenses in their sentences. According to SST we could categorize this type of errors as misformation. Confusion or wrong use of verb tenseswere found out in the following sentences:

04. Why do not you buy yourself a new coat? (Two primary pupils used future simple tense instead of present simple tense in the sentence: Why will you not buy yourself a new coat?)

05. I have never drunk Japanese tea. (He/She used past simple tense instead of present perfect tense in the sentece: I never did not drink Japanese tea.)

06. I am going to tell her about it tomorrow. (Two learners formed this sentence by using present simple tense instead of the structure going to which is not a tense but a special expression to talk about the future. They wrote the sentence: I tell her about it tomorrow.)

08. How long have you been playing the piano? (We detected two errors in the use verb tenses when primary pupils had used past continuous tense instead of present perfect continuous in the sentence: How long were you playing the piano?

10. Could she len dme some money? (Three primary pupils formed interrorgative sentence in present tense by using modal verb can instead of could which is typical for the past: Can she lend me some money? )

11. How many foreign countries have you visited? (Two primary pupils used past simple tense instead of present perfect tense in the sentence: How many foreign countries did you visit?)

13. I want to learn English. (He/She used present continuous tense instead of present simple tense in the sentence: I am wanting to learn English.)

15. Our teacher told us about it. (Three primary pupils used past continuous tense instead of past simple tense in the sentence: Our teacher was telling us about it.)

17. My sister is not living with us now. (Five primary pupils used present simple tense instead of present continuous tense in the sentence: My sister does not live with us now.)

19. How is this word written? (Two primary pupils used past simple tense instead of present tense in passive: How did this word write?)

20. Will you help me? (Two primary pupils used present simple tense instead of future simple tense in the sentence: Do you help me?)

We summarized errors in the use of verb tenses in the following table 3:

Tab. 3 Structure of Errors in the Use of Verb Tenses

Sentence

Correct Verb Tense

Incorrect Verb Tense

Total of Errors

04.

present simple tense

future simple tense

2

05.

present perfect tense

past simple tense

1

06.

going to (planned future)

present simple tense

2

08.

present perfect continuous

past continuous

2

10.

past simple tense

present simple tense

3

11.

present perfect tense

past simple tense

2

13.

present simple tense

present continuous tense

1

15.

past simple tense

past continuous tense

3

17.

present continuous tense

present simple tense

5

19.

passive voice (present)

past simple tense

2

20.

future simple tense

present simple tense

2

2.2.3 Errors in the Use of Articles

The use of articles is often a big problem especially for those learners whose mother language does not contain articles. Unlike English we know that Slovak language does not contain the articles. Therefore Slovak primary pupils have to learn the rules of their correct usage. We found out twenty-one errors in the use of articles (i.e. 14,7 % of the total number of errors) which had been made by seventeen primary pupils in their written works. According to SST we divided these errors into three groups. We ordered them as follows:

1. omission of articles = 10 errors (47,6 %)

2. addition of articles = 9 errors (42,9 %)

3. misformation of articles = 2 errors (9,5 %)

We illustrated these errors in the picture 3.

2.2.3.1 Omission of Articles

Nearly the half of errors in the use of articles was caused by the omission of them. The total number of omitted articles was ten (47,6 %).

The sentences where articles were omitted:

02. He read an interesting book. (In this sentence the definite article an was omitted a three times.)

04. Why do not you buy yourself a new coat? (In this sentence the definite article a was omitted a three times.)

08. How long have you been playing the piano? (The definite article the was omitted once.)

16. Have you ever broken a mirror? (In this sentence the definite article a was omitted a three times too.)

We use indefinite articles before general, non-specific, singular nouns, which are countable. We always use definite article the in phrase ...play the piano....

2.2.3.2 Addition of Articles

This type of errors was represented by nine errors (i.e. 42,9 %). Primary pupils made these errors because they had added extra articles to the sentences. Our analysis showed that pupils had added extra both definite and indefinite articles to the sentences.

The errors of this type were found out in sentences:

05. I have never drunk Japanese tea. (Three pupils added definite article the in the sentence: I have never drunk the Japanese tea.)

07. Some people are afraid of mice. (Two pupils added indefinite article a in the sentence: Some people are afraid of a mice.)

11. How many foreign countries have you visited? (Only one pupil added definite article the in the sentence: How many the foreign countries have you visited? )

13. I want to learn English. (Three pupils added definite article the in the sentence: I want to learn the English.)

We found out there a lot of errors, for instance: errors in the use of indefinite articles ‘a’ in front of the noun in plural, errors in the use of definite article ‘the’ in front of a proper noun instead of zero article error in the use of definite article ‘the’ in front of a noun with general meaning.

2.2.3.3 Misformation of Articles

We found out two errors (9,5 %) of this type because primary pupils had used wrong forms of articles in their sentences.

The sentences where articles were used incorrectly:

08. How long have you been playing the piano? (He/She used indefinite article a instead of definite article the in the sentence: How long have you been playing a piano?)

16. Have you ever broken a mirror? (He/She used the wrong form of indefinite article, i.e. he or she used an instead of a: Have you ever broken an mirror?)

Primary pupils ignored the rules of the use both indefinite a definite article in their sentences.

2.2.4 Word Order Errors

The major difference between English and Slovak language is that English is analytic language but Slovak is synthetic. The word order within both languages is different too. English has got fixed word order. We cannot change the word order in English sentence because their meaning would be changed. Unlike English there is free and unfixed word order in Slovak language.

These errors were 4th the most numerous category of errors in our research. We found out eighteen errors (12,6 % of all errors) when primary pupils used wrong word order in their sentences. We evaluated this category of errors separately because learners had placed various grammatical constituents in wrong order many times.

The big problem for Slovak pupils was the placement of both nouns and verbs within interrogative sentences (i.e. Inversion).

04. Why do not you buy yourself a new coat? (Two primary pupils formed this sentence: Why you do not buy yourself a new coat?)

08. How long have you been playing the piano? (Two primary pupils wrote this sentence: How long have been you playing the piano?)

11. How many foreign countries have you visited? (Two primary pupils formed the sentences: How many foreign countries you have visited?)

18. What were you thinking about? (Two primary pupils formed this sentence: What you were thinking about?)

They confused the placement of some pronouns within the sentences:

10. Could she lend me some money? (He/She wrote this sentence: Could me lend she some money?)

20. Will you help me? (He/She formed this sentence: Will me help you?)

Some of them made errors when they had placed prepositions incorrectly within the sentences:

06. I am going to tell her about it tomorrow. (He/She wrote this sentence as follows: I am going to tell her tomorrow about it.)

18. What were you thinking about? (He/She formed this sentence: What were you about thinking?).

Two primary pupils were not able to make correct form of the verb ‘have got’ in negation.

09. I have not got a lot of money on me. (They wrote this sentence as follows: I have got not a lot of money on me.)

Two primary pupils wrong formed the interrogative sentence when they had placed demonstrative pronoun incorrectly.

19. How is this word written? (Two learners wrote this sentence as follows: How this is word written?)

He/She changed the word order within other sentences:

01. This information is not very important. (He/She wrote: This is not information very important.)

19. How is this word written? (He/She formed this sentence: How written is this word?)

2.2.5 Errors in the Use of Prepositions

Errors in the use of prepositions were the other significant category of errors in our research. The total number of these errors was ten (7,0 %) and they were found out in seven pupils’ works. In the other words, thirty per cent of pupils made some errors in the use of prepositions. We divided these errors according to Surface Strategy Taxonomy (SST) into four groups. The structure of these errors was as follows:

1. omission of prepositions = 5 errors (50,0 %)

2. addition of prepositions = 3 errors (30,0 %)

3. misformation of prepositions = 2 errors (20,0 %)

The types of errors in the use of prepositions were also illustrated in the picture 4.

2.2.5.1 Omission of Prepositions

This type of errors is characterized by the absence of a preposition in an utterance, i.e. some primary pupils omitted some prepositions in their written answers. The total number of omitted prepositions was five (50,0 % of all errors in the use of prepositions).

Prepositions were omitted in the following sentences:

09. I have not got a lot of money on me. (Preposition on was omitted once: I have not got a lot of money me.)

18. What were you thinking about? (Preposition about was omitted a four times: What were you thinking?)

We have to use preposition of place on in the previous sentence (09). We always place preposition about at the end of an interrogative sentence (18).

2.2.5.2 Addition of Prepositions

We detected three errors when extra prepositions had been added. This type of error is called simple addition and it is one of the subtypes of addition. The occurrence of this error comprised 30,0 % of all errors in the use of prepositions.

Examples of sentences where extra prepositions were added:

08. How long have you been playing the piano? (Preposition on was added in the sentence once: How long have you been playing on the piano?)

14. Answer my question! (Preposition on was added in the sentence twice: Answer on my question!)

We can see two situations when the preposition on cannot be used in these sentences.

2.2.5.3 Misformation of Prepositions

During our analysis we found out two errors (20,0 %) of this type. These errors were characteristic by the use of the wrong forms of prepositions. In the other words, the forms of prepositions were misused. These errors were made by two primary pupils.

Examples of sentences where the prepositions had wrong forms:

09. I have not got a lot of money on me. (Preposition for was used instead of on once: I have not got a lot of money for me.)

12. Listen to me! I am talking to you. (Preposition on was used instead of to once: Listen to me! I am talking on you.)

2.2.6 Spelling Errors

The English contains over 800,000 words. Each word can be a possible source of spelling errors for EFL learners. Due to this fact they should pay attention to the vocabulary which they use in both speaking and writing. We analysed twenty-three written works and there we found out nine spelling errors (6,3 % of all errors). We divided these errors according to SST as follows:

1. omission of letters within the words = 5 errors (55,6 %)

2. addition of a letter within the word = 1 error (11,1 %)

3. misformation of the word = 1 error (11,1 %)

4. misordering of letters within the words = 2 errors (22,2 %)

Structure of spelling errors is illustrated in the picture 5.

2.2.6.1 Omission of Letters within the Words

We divided five errors (55,6 %) which primary pupils had made when they had omitted some letters within the words.

02. He read an interesting book. (He/She omitted vowel e within the word interesting as follows: He read an intresting book.)

06. I am going to tell her about it tomorrow. (Two pupils omitted consonant r

within the word tomorrow as follows: I am going to tell her about it tomorow.)

16. Have you ever broken a mirror? (He/She omitted consonant r within the word mirror as follows: Have you ever broken a miror?)

19. How is this word written? (He/She omitted consonant t within the word written as follows: How is this word writen?)

2.2.6.2 Addition of a Letter within the Word

Only one error (11,1 %) was found out when primary pupil had added an extra letter within the word.

05. I have never drunk Japanese tea. (He/She added consonant s within the word Japanese as follows: I have never drunk Japanesse tea.)

2.2.6.3 Misformation of the Word

There was only one error (11,1 %) in pupil’s written works.

20. Will you help me? (He/She made spelling error when he/she had written the word helf instead of help in the sentence: Will you helf me?)

The word helf does not exist in English.

2.2.6.4 Misordering of Letters within the Words

We detected two errors of this type (22,2 %) when he/she had placed letters within the word incorrectly.

05. I have never drunk Japanese tea. (He/She made an error within the object tea when he/she had changed the letter order as follows: I have never drunk Japanese tae.)

11. How many foreign countries have you visited? (He/She changed the letter order within the adjective foreign as follows: How many foreing countries have you visited?)

2.2.7 Errors in the Use of Pronouns

Pronouns are other significant linguistic category in language system. There are many subcategories in their structure and a lot of pronouns in each category. However both their system and the usage are difficult for many learners they were not ‘the top’ problem for primary pupils in our research. Our analysis detected six errors (4,2 %) of all errors which primary pupils had made in their written works. These errors were made by five pupils.

Structure of types of errors in the use of pronouns by Slovak primary pupils was following:

1. omission of a pronoun = 1 error (16,6 %)

2. addition of a pronoun = 1 error (16,6 %)

3. misformation of pronouns = 4 errors (66,8 %)

This structure of errors in the use of pronouns is illustrated in the picture 6.

Using Surface Strategy Taxonomy we were able to describe these errors as follows:

2.2.7.1 Omission of a Pronoun

There was only one error of this type (16,6 %) which we had found out in pupil’s written works.

10. Could she len dme some money? (Indefinite pronoun some was omitted in the interrogative sentence: Could she lend me money?)

We use indefinite pronoun some in front of uncountable nouns where this pronoun usually expresses the quantity of something.

2.2.7.2 Addition of a Pronoun

We identified one error (16,6 % of all errors in the use of pronouns) when a primary pupil had added extra pronoun in a sentence.

14. Answer my question! (Personal pronoun you was incorrectly added in the sentence: You answer my question!)

We omit the personal pronoun you in an imperative sentence when we express the second person (i.e. without a subject).

2.2.7.3 Misformation of Pronouns

We say about misformation of the pronouns when we find out the use of wrong form of the pronoun in a sentence. We identified four errors (66,8 % of all errors in the use of pronouns) when primary pupils had used  wrong forms of the pronouns.

Sentences with errors:

04. Why do not you buy yourself a new coat? (Three primary pupils used the wrong form of reflexive pronoun yourselves instead of yourself in the sentence: Why do not you buy yourselves a new coat?)

We can say that both object in singular (a new coat) and Slovak translation of the word (you) indicate the use of reflexive pronoun yourself.

07. Some people are afraid of mice. (Only one primary pupil made an error in the use of the pronoun in this sentence. The pupil used the wrong form of indefinite pronoun when he had written each instead of some in the sentence: Each people are afraid of mice.)

When he/she used each instead of some he/she had changed the sense of the whole sentence.

2.2.8 Errors in the Use of Plural Nouns

We can say that in English, just like Slovak, the nouns are inflected for grammatical number – that is singular or plural. Slovak plurals are always regular whereas English has got a range of ways in which plurals are formed. This category of errors was represented in our research by five errors (3,5 % of all errors) which primary pupils had made in their written works. We divide these errors according to SST as follows:

1. incorrect addition of morpheme -s = 2 errors (40 %)

2. misformation of plural nouns = 3 errors (60 %)

Structure of errors in the use of plural nouns is illustrated in the picture 7.

2.2.8.1 Incorrect Addition of Morpheme –s

We detected two errors (40 %) when primary pupils had added incorrectly morpheme –s when they had formed plural of a noun.

We found out these errors in sentence:

07. Some people are afraid of mice. (Primary pupils wrote this sentence with error: Some peoples are afraid of mice.)

We can term this error as Double markings because the noun ‘people’ we use only in plural and the use of morpheme –s is incorrect.

2.2.8.2 Misformation of Plural Nouns

We analysed three errors (60 %) when primary pupils had formed plural of a noun in a wrong way.

07. Some people are afraid of mice. (Three pupils used object mouses instead of mice in the sentence: Some people are afraid of mouses.)

This type of error is also called as Regularization error. Noun mouse is in singular and its plural form is mice. We term this form of plural as Mutation plural. There are plenty of nouns in English whose plural is formed in this way. Slovak EFL learners need to learn these forms of plurals because their mother language does not contain them.

2.3 Research Conclusions

We transformed our findings into the following research conclusions:

Errors in the use of verb forms were the most frequent category of all error categories in our research. We detected forty-nine errors (34,2 %) of this type and we divided these errors according to Surface Strategy Taxonomy into three types. The most numerous type of errors was the misformation of verb forms (thirty-one errors, 63,4 %). There were found out eight cases when non-existing verb forms had been used in sentences (e.g. red instead of read, writted instead of written). There were found out twelve errors when primary pupils had used simple past verb forms instead of past participle verb forms (e.g. broke instead of broken, drank instead of drunk). Primary pupils made three errors when they had not respected the rule subject and verb agreement and had used wrong verb form people is instead people are. Six of them used wrong verb form (borrow instead of lend) because they had not been aware of both the meaning and the use of these verbs. And finally, two learners used incorrectly verb form to do (does) instead of to be (is) in third singular person. Primary pupils made less errors (twelve, i.e. 24,4 %) when they had added some redundant elements within the verb forms (e.g. readed instead of read, lends instead of lend etc.). The omission of items within the verb forms was the type of errors which had been found out a six times, i.e. 12,2 % (e.g. visit instead of visited). We tried to find out the causes of the errors which primary pupils had made in the use of verb forms. They had two main problems: formation of verb forms and their use in writing. Most of them were not able to form the correct verb forms, they often used verb forms which do not exist and sometimes they did not know the meaning of verbs which they had used in their sentences. Most of them did not know irregular verbs and they were not able to use them in a correct way. Due to these facts they need to improve their learning in this area of English grammar.

We found out twenty-five errors (17,5 %) in the use of verb tenses. Primary pupils made these errors because they had confused (or wrong used) verb tenses in their sentences. We categorized this type of errors as misformation of verb tenses. There were eleven sentences of twenty where the errors were detected. Structure of verb tense errors was illustrated in table 3. There are several rules for each verb tenses in English, how to use them and when to use them correctly. Therefore we will not explain these rules separately for each error in the use verb tenses which we found out in our research. We want to point out the essence of the problem. The use of present perfect tense (or present perfect continuous) was the problem for Slovak primary pupils. They confused these verb tenses and used past tenses (simple or continuous) instead of present perfect tense (five errors, sentences No. 05, 08, 11). Probably the absence of present perfect tense in Slovak language is the cause of errors in their sentences. They also mixed up present simple tense with present continuous tense in their sentences (six errors, sentences No. 13, 17) and present simple tense with future simple tense (four errors, No. 04, 20). We found out the problems in the formation of sentences in passive voice (two errors, sentence No. 19). Past simple tense was confused with past continuous tense a three times (sentence No. 15). Both the construction ‘going to’ and planned future were the problem for two primary pupils who had formed their sentences in a wrong way (sentence No. 6). English grammar errors in the area of the verb tenses are common and easy to make. The difference in both languages English and Slovak influenced the results of our research. The absence of some verb tenses (e.g. perfect tenses) in Slovak language as well as different construction of verb tenses in English caused some errors in this area of English grammar. As for the causes we see a possibility for Slovak primary pupils how to avoid the errors in the use of verb tenses in English. They have to learn English verb tenses and memorized them. Then they should practise verb tenses regularly in their speaking and writing.

Our analysis showed that primary pupils had made a lot of errors in the use of articles. Their total number was twenty-one (14,7 % of all errors). This area of English grammar was the third area where the most errors had been detected. The errors were divided into three groups. The most frequent types of errors were omission of the articles (ten errors, 47,6 %) and wrong addition of the articles (nine errors, 42,9 %). Only two errors (9,5 %) were identified as misformation when pupils had used wrong forms of articles in the sentences. We may say that both definite and indefinite articles were omitted in pupils’ works. We found out nine errors when articles a/an had been omitted in front of countable, general nouns in the singular. Definite article was omitted once. We also detected nine errors when articles had been added incorrectly. There were two errors in the use of indefinite articles ‘a’ in front of the noun in plural, three errors in the use of definite article ‘the’ in front of a proper noun instead of zero article and four errors in the use of definite article ‘the’ in front of nouns with general meaning. These types of errors are often made by EFL learners whose mother language does not contain articles. Slovak language does not contain them. On the other hand, it is inevitable for Slovak learners to know the rules of their usage.

We found out that word order errors were the problem for Slovak primary pupils because they had made eighteen errors (12,6 % of all errors) in their written works. We may say that fifteen primary pupils of all (i.e. 65 %) made these errors in their sentences. Due to the difference both languages English and Slovak these errors are common in pupils’ speaking and writing. We found out several areas where Slovak primary pupils made lots of errors when they had formed their sentences. They used wrong word order within interrogative sentences because they had not respected indirect order of words in their sentences (e.g. sentences No. 04, 08, 11, 18). They also confused the placement of some pronouns in the sentences (e.g. sentences No. 10, 20). Learners made a few errors when they had placed preposition incorrectly within some sentences (e.g. sentences No. 06, 18). Some of them were not able to make the correct form of the verb ‘have got’ in negation and they used wrong word order (e.g. sentence No. 09). Slovak primary pupils have to use correct word order within a sentence because the meaning of English sentence depends on the placement of words within a sentence.

Our research also showed that Slovak learners had made some errors in the use of prepositions. The total number of these errors was ten (7,0 % of all errors). Using SST we divided these errors into three groups. The most frequent errors were prepositions which had been omitted in the sentences. There are four errors in the use of prepositions when preposition ‘about’ should be placed at the end of a sentence and this preposition was omitted by pupils. This sentence had a question form. We also found out an error when the preposition of place ‘on’ was omitted in a sentence. We detected three cases when the extra preposition ‘on’ was added in sentences. The use of the wrong form of a preposition was identified in two sentences (one error in each sentence). Causes of the appearance of errors in the use of prepositions can be different. We can say that there are some causes of their appearance in pupils’ works. Firstly, we state that there are a lot of differences in the use of prepositions between English and Slovak sentence. Secondly, some Slovak pupils do not know the rules of their usage in English sentences and they often omit the prepositions. According to some authors, these errors are typical for EFL learners.

Our Error Analysis showed nine spelling errors (6,3 % of all errors) which learners made in their written works. These errors were divided according to SST into four groups. The most frequent type of errors was the omission of letters within the words (five errors, 55,6 %). Consonant doubling was the biggest spelling problem for Slovak primary pupils. They often omitted some consonants within the words (e.g. mirror – miror, tomorrow – tomorow, written – writen). We can say that there is no reliable rule in English whether to double a consonant or not when we use similarly sounding words. Therefore Slovak primary pupils have to memorize word by word when to double and when not to. The similar error (i.e. 11,1 %) was found out when a learner had used extra consonant within the word Japanese – Japanesse. We also found out two errors (22,2 %) when primary pupils had used a wrong letter order within the words (e.g. tea – tae, foreign – foreing). Only one primary pupil (11,1 %) used the word helf (instead of help) which does not exist in English vocabulary. It is difficult to define causes of occurrence of spelling errors. Primary pupils had ample time to revise and self-correct their written works before handing in. Therefore we say about errors. According to some authors, they can also be caused by dyslexia. However these spelling errors were not the top problem for Slovak primary pupils in our research they should use their vocabulary carefully.

We analysed some errors in the use of pronouns during our research. Primary pupils made six errors (4,2 %) of all detected errors in their written works. This area of English grammar did not cause primary pupils many problems because this grammar category took next-to-last place in the scale of errors. We may summarize our findings as follows. Errors which learners made in the use of the pronouns had been divided according to SST into three groups. The most errors were found out in the use of incorrect forms of pronouns (66,8 %). For instance, they used the wrong form of reflexive pronouns yourselves instead of yourself, they also used the indefinite pronoun each instead of some. The same percentage of occurrence of errors (16,6 %) was found out in the following use of pronouns: a pronoun which had been omitted in a sentence and a pronoun which had been incorrectly added in a sentence. There was found out only one error of each type. English contains a lot of pronouns. Sometimes, EFL learners do not know both the system of pronouns and their use in practice. Probably it was the cause of occurrence of errors in pupils’ written works which had been analysed in our research.

The use of plurals was not difficult for Slovak primary pupils due to the occurrence of errors in their written works. We analysed five errors in the use of plural forms of nouns (i.e. 3,5 % of all errors) which pupils had made. They made the least number of errors in this category of errors. We identified only two types of errors. We divided them according to SST as follows: incorrect addition of morpheme –s (two errors, 40 % of these errors) and misformation of plural nouns (three errors, 60 % of these errors). We found out them only in the sentence No.7. The first type of error was Double markings. According to SST by Dulay et al. (1982) it is a subtype of errors within the addition. Learners added morpheme –s incorrectly to the noun people which we use only in plural. The second type of error is called Regularization error. Learners used a wrong form of plural when they used word mouses instead of word mice in their sentences. This form of plural is called Mutation plural and this category of English plural contains plenty of plurals which Slovak EFL learners have to learn. Possible causes of occurrence of errors in learners’ works were as follows. Probably, primary pupils were not aware of the number of noun people (which is always used in plural) and therefore they had formed plural by using morpheme –s. On the other hand, the ignorance of plural forms which are known as Mutation plurals was the cause of errors.

2.4 The Suggestions for Improving Pedagogical Practice.

Taking the results of our research into consideration we were able to present our attitude towards errors. In our opinion they are an important part of teaching and learning process because they help teachers and pupils to focus their attention on areas of the language, which are not sufficiently fixed.

We tried to formulate following suggestions for teaching practice:

Slovak teachers of English should not be afraid of using translations of the rules when discussing grammar. In our opinion, it would be a great help for the pupils to point out the differences and similarities between Slovak and English.

We would suggest doing grammar revision before writing tests or essays etc., focused on the most difficult areas pupils have problems.

Teachers should give learners a chance for self-correction.

Teachers should correct all grammar errors which pupils had made in their written works.

Teachers should point out the most frequent learners` errors and to explain the ones in detail. In the other words, they should discuss errors with the students.

It is necessary to give information to students about symbols which we use in our correction process.

Moreover, learners should write more compositions, papers as well as dictations etc. It would help them to practice correct English spelling.

We suggest the repeating all parts of English grammar which are the most difficult for Slovak primary learners.

Taking advantage of knowledge of modern English methodology, teachers should prepare their grammar lessons in a gripping way. It would also help students to learn grammar rules during the lesson. For example, teachers should apply the communicative language teaching method when they explain English grammar.

Slovak teachers should prefer giving more exercises in applying grammar to giving the theory of grammar.

We suggested several ways how to improve learners` grammar. We can warmly recommend them for existing pedagogical practice.

Final Conclusion

The aim of this work was to find out the areas of English grammar which are the most difficult for Slovak primary pupils who learn English as a foreign language. We realized the research whose results are able to answer the questions where Slovak learners made errors, what types of errors they made, what was the frequency of occurrence of each type of errors and what were the possible causes of appearance of errors.

Theoretical part of this work, which is divided into five chapters, acquainted the readers with information about errors and mistakes in the field of contemporary linguistics.

In the practical part (called research) we formulated both research question and research hypothesis. The task of our research was also to prove or deny our hypothesis. We used Error Analysis as the research method and we analysed twenty-three written outputs which had been made by pupils of 9th grade at primary school in Slovakia. The data were collected in October 2012 (during our pedagogical practice at primary school). We clearly analysed pupils’ written works and we tabellized, illustrated as well as described our findings in details.

Firstly, we want to answer the question what areas of English grammar were the most difficult for our participants, i.e. where they made the most errors in their writings. We found out one hundred and fourty-three errors in pupils’ written works. We took morphological and syntactic point of view into consideration and we divided the errors into eight categories according to their number and occurrence in descending order: errors in the use of verb forms, errors in the use of verb tenses, errors in the use of articles, word order errors, errors in the use of prepositions, spelling errors, errors in the use of pronouns, errors in the use of plural nouns. Our hypothesis was validated partially. The usages of verb forms and verb tenses were the most numerous errors in the pupils’ works. In the other words, these areas of English grammar were a big problem for our participants. On the contrary, errors in the use of articles took third place instead of errors in the use of prepositions.

The next step in our research was the identification of error types. We decided to use Surface Strategy Taxonomy which explains the ways surface structures are altered. In each category of errors we identified some of these types of errors: omission, addition, misformation and misordering.

The most numerous type of errors in the use of verb forms was misformation of verb forms. Our participants used a lot of wrong verb forms in their sentences. For example they often used non-existing verb forms. Some of them confused regular and irregular verbs and some learners did not respect the rule ‘subject-verb agreement’. The use of verbs in third singular person was the problem too. In the other words, most of them were not able to form the correct verb forms, they used verb forms which do not exist and sometimes they were not aware of the meaning of verbs which they had used in their sentences. Most of them did not know irregular verbs.

Verb tense errors were caused by learners’ incapability to make a decision which verb tense to use. In the other words, pupils made the errors because they had used wrong verb tenses in their sentences. We found out eleven confusions of verb tenses and twenty-five errors (see table 3) which pupils had made. We identified this type of errors as misformation of verb tenses. The absence of some tenses (e.g. perfect tenses) in Slovak language as well as different construction of verb tenses in English caused a lot of errors in this area of English grammar.

Primary pupils made a lot of errors in the use of articles. Omission of articles was the most frequent type of errors. In the other words, definite and indefinite articles were omitted in pupils’ works. Errors in the use of articles are typical for EFL learners (including Slovak learners) whose mother language does not contain articles.

Word order errors were also the problem for Slovak primary pupils. Due to the difference both languages English and Slovak these errors are common in pupils’ speaking and writing. A lot of words were misordered in their sentences. They had serious problems to form interrogative sentences and the negation of sentences.

Due to the difference between languages, Slovak learners made some errors in the use of prepositions. They often omitted prepositions in their sentences. Probably they did not know the rules of their usage in English sentences.

We also identified a few spelling errors. The most frequent type of error was the omission of letters within the words. Consonant doubling was the biggest spelling problem for our participants.

Slovak learners made some errors in the use of pronouns when they had used their wrong forms in the sentences.

We found out the least number of errors in the use of plural nouns. The learners formed some plural forms of nouns incorrectly. They had a problem with mutation plurals.

To sum up, the use of correct English grammar is important part of learners’ speaking and writing. Due to this fact we tried to point out the areas of English grammar which had been the most difficult for Slovak primary pupils. We also formulated some suggestions for improving pedagogical practice.

We hope that the work will encourage readers to explore some more issues of errors and mistakes in teaching learning process.

Résumé

Dôležitou súčasťou ovládania cudzích jazykov je gramatická správnosť hovorenej i písomnej formy cudzieho jazyka. Akýkoľvek cudzojazyčný prejav je spojený s rizikom výskytu chyby. Pohľad na chybu sa rokmi menil a v súčasnom období je chyba chápaná ako prirodzená súčasť učebného procesu. V štruktúre chýb patria gramatické chyby medzi najčastejšie sa vyskytujúce a spravidla sú aj najťažšie napraviteľné. Na druhej strane sa niektorí žiaci až príliš sústredia na gramatickú správnosť svojho prejavu, čím môžu utrpieť niektoré oblasti používania jazyka, napríklad plynulé rozprávanie. Na slovenských základných školách v súčasnom období prevláda vyvážený prístup, čo sa týka dôrazu na gramatickú správnosť a rozvoj jazykových zručností.

S cieľom zistiť aktuálny stav ovládania anglickej gramatiky žiakmi II. stupňa vybranej základnej školy, zrealizovali sme aj náš výskum, v ktorom sme sa zamerali predovšetkým na gramatickú správnosť ich písomného prejavu. Tejto problematike nie je v súčasnosti na Slovensku venovaná taká pozornosť, ako je tomu v zahraničí, kde sa angličtina tiež vyučuje ako cudzí jazyk. Rozhodli sme sa preto aspoň čiastočne vyplniť tento priestor a prispieť tak výsledkami nášho výskumu k téme, ktorá je aj v súčasnom období stále aktuálna.

Prácu, ktorú predkladáme, sme rozdelili do dvoch základných častí. V prvej, teoretickej časti, informujeme čitateľa v piatich kapitolách o poznatkoch súčasnej lingvistiky, ktorá sa zaoberá terminológiou chýb, ich rozdelením, zdrojmi chýb a v neposlednom rade aj metódou rozboru chýb, ktorá je skôr známa pod názvom „Error Analysis".

Druhá, praktická časť práce, tématicky nadväzuje na teoretické poznatky a prináša čitateľovi konkrétne informácie o výskume, ktorý bol realizovaný na konkrétnej slovenskej základnej škole počas našej pedagogickej praxe v mesiaci október 2012.

Cieľom nášho výskumu bolo zistiť a pomenovať konkrétne oblasti anglickej gramatiky, ktorá robí našim žiakom najviac problémov pri používaní písomnej formy jazyka. Zaujímalo nás predovšetkým to, kde žiaci robia gramatické chyby, akých typov chýb sa dopúšťajú a aké boli možné príčiny ich objavenia sa v prácach žiakov. Cieľovou skupinou nášho výskumu boli žiaci II. stupňa základnej školy, ktorí zahájili svoj 9. ročník povinnej školskej dochádzky a ktorí sa učia angličtinu ako svoj jediný cudzí jazyk. Na začiatku výskumu bola sformulovaná výskumná otázka a v nadväznosti na ňu aj príslušná hypotéza, ktorej platnosť sa mala potvrdiť, respektíve vyvrátiť po získaní výsledkov výskumu. Ako výskumnú metódu sme si zvolili metódu rozboru chýb (Error Analysis), ktorej postup sme detailne rozpracovali v samostatnej kapitole tejto práce. Ako výskumný nástroj sme použili písomné riešenia žiakov na základe vypracovaného prekladového cvičenia, ktoré pozostávalo z transformácie dvadsiatich slovenských viet zameraných na rôzne gramatické javy do anglického jazyka. Všetci žiaci tak mali možnosť pracovať s rovnakým zadaním úlohy a na vypracovanie mali k dispozícii rovnaký časový interval, vrátane času na sebaopravu tesne pred odovzdaním písomností. Tieto písomné výstupy žiakov boli podrobne analyzované a zistené údaje boli prehľadne usporiadané do tabuliek i grafov a detailne opísané. Z morfologicko-syntaktického hľadiska boli zistené chyby roztriedené do ôsmych kategórií a v rámci každej kategórie boli za pomoci Surface Strategy Taxonomy vyšpecifikované jednotlivé typy chýb, ich počet ako aj  frekvencia ich výskytu. Zo zistených údajov boli sformulované príslušné závery a to zvlášť pre každú kategóriu chýb.

Zo zistených výsledkov vyplynulo, že nami vyslovená hypotéza sa potvrdila iba čiastočne, nakoľko najviac gramatických chýb žiaci urobili v používaní slovesných foriem a časov. Nasledovali chyby pri používaní členov, chyby v usporiadaní vetných členov vo vete, ďalej to boli chyby pri používaní predložiek, pravopisné chyby a chyby pri požívaní zámen a tvorení množného čísla podstatných mien. Najfrekventovanejším typom chyby bolo vytvorenie, respektíve použitie nesprávnej formy konkrétnej položky (slovesnej formy, času, zámena alebo plurálu podstaných mien). Vynechanie členov, predložiek či písmen vo vnútri slov bolo druhým najčastejším typom chýb v prácach žiakov. Nesprávne postavenie vetných členov vo vete bolo ďalším typom chyby, ktorú žiaci robili pomerne často. V našom výkume sme sa tiež snažili pátrať po príčinách, ktoré mohli spôsobiť tieto chyby. Za mnohé môžeme uviesť napríklad odličšnosť obidvoch jazykov, neznalosť gramatických pravidiel a iné. Naše zistenia v tomto smere sú bližšie rozpracované v kapitole závery výskumu.

Z vyššie uvedených výsledkov výskumu a v kombinácii s poznatkami zo štúdia odbornej literatúry sme sa pokúsili navrhnúť súbor konkrétnych opatrení pre existujúcu pedagogickú prax, ktoré môžu napomôcť učiteľom, ale i žiakom eliminovať výskyt gramatických chýb v hovorenej, ale hlavne v písomnej forme jazyka.

Na záver chceme vysloviť presvedčenie, že táto práca oslovila skupinu čitateľov, ktorí sa o anglický jazyk zaujímajú a pracujú s ním a že ich povzbudila k hlbšiemu zamysleniu sa nad touto problematikou.

List of Resources

BARTRAM, M. – WALTON, R. Correction.  Mistake Management: a positive approach for language teachers. Hove: Language Teaching Publications, 1991. 122 p. ISBN 0-906717-91-4.

BROWN, H. D. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Fourth Edition. New York: Longman, 2000. 352 p. ISBN 0-13-017816-0.

DULAY, H. C. et al. Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982. 315 p. ISBN 0-19-502553-9.

ELLIS, R. – BARKHUIZEN, G. Analysing Learner Language. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. 404 p. ISBN 978-0194316347.

EDGE, J. Mistakes and Correction. Harlow: Longman Group UK Limited, 1989. 70 p. ISBN 0-582-74626-4.

HARMER, J. The Practise of English Language Teaching. 1. published. Harlow: Longman, 1983. 252 p. ISBN 0-582-74612-4.

JAMES, C. Errors in Language Learning and Use: Exploring Error Analysis. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman Limited, 1998. 304 p. ISBN 0-582-25763-8.

RICHARDS, J. C. – SCHMIDT, R. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Third Edition. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2002. 595 p. ISBN 0-582-43825-X.

PULVERNESS, A. Correcting Written Work. [online]. [cit. 2012-09-21.] Available in the Internet: <http://www.cambridge.org/servlet/file/store7/item621076/version1/TKT_ART_PulvernessCorrectingWrittenWork.pdf>