Identifying Grammatical Errors and Mistakes via a Written Learner Corpus in a Foreign Language Context

Year 2024, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 91 - 106, 30.12.2024

Merve Gazioğlu , Selami Aydın

https://doi.org/10.51726/jlr.1553484

Abstract

Foreign language learners of English have difficulty in applying grammar rules in writing despite prolonged training focusing on grammar. This corpus-driven error analysis study examines English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ grammatical errors through a written learner corpus, which contains essays written by Level 2 and 3 students in a language program at a state university. The study also aims to reveal whether they make any improvement within a term. Using James’s (1998) taxonomy of errors, the data were analyzed via a corpus tool, “AntConc”. The results of descriptive analysis for error frequency showed that the most common grammatical errors were of verb conjugation, prepositions, articles, grammatical numbers, and voice, respectively. The study also showed no significant progress for Level 2 learners while Level 3 learners slightly improved by rectifying the number of errors.

Keywords

Corpus Linguistics, error analysis, grammatical errors, corrective feedback

References

• Andrews, R., Torgerson, C., Beverton, S., Freeman, A., Locke, T., Low, G., Robinson, A., & Zhu, D. (2006). The effect of grammar teaching on writing development. British Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 39-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920500401997
• Anthony, L. (2005). AntConc: Design and development of a freeware corpus analysis toolkit for the technical writing classroom. Proceedings of International Professional Communication Conference, 729-737. https://doi.org/10.1109/IPCC.2005.1494244
• Atmaca, Ç. (2016). Error analysis of Turkish EFL learners: A case study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 234-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.007
• Ayar, Z. (2020). Error analysis of Turkish learners’ English paragraphs from lexical and grammatical aspects. ELT Research Journal, 9(2), 123-134.
• Başöz, T., & Aydın, S. (2011). An analysis of the grammatical mistakes made by advanced EFL writers. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(2), 296-306.
• Botley, S. P. (2015). Errors versus mistakes: A false dichotomy? Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 11(1), 81-94.
• Burnard, L. (2005). Metadata for corpus work. In M. Wynne (Ed.), Developing linguistic corpora: A guide to good practice (pp. 30-46). Oxbow Books.
• Can, C. (2017). A learner corpus-based study on verb errors of Turkish EFL learners. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(9), 167-175. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i9.2612
• Cawley, V. D. (2017). Contextualized grammar instruction: A case study of Master's students' Writing Development. Doctoral Dissertation, Judson University.
• Celce‐Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar pedagogy in second and foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 459-480.
• Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learner’s errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5, 161–70. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1967.5.1-4.161
• Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Dagdeviren, G. (2010). Use of English articles by speakers of Turkish in the EFL setting. Novitas-ROYAL, 4(2), 242-250.
• Demirel, E. T. (2017). Detection of common errors in Turkish EFL students’ writing through a corpus analytic approach. English Language Teaching, 10(10), 159-178. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n10p159
• Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. Oxford University Press.
• Duygun, B., & Karabacak, P. (2022). An error analysis on Turkish EFL learners’ writing tasks. The Literacy Trek, 8(2), 121-141. https://doi.org/10.47216/literacytrek.1117158
• Fareed, M., Ashraf, A., & Bilal, M. (2016). ESL learners’ writing skills: Problems, factors and suggestions. Journal of education and social sciences, 4(2), 81-92. https://doi.org/10.20547/jess0421604201
• Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181-201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490
• Gazioğlu, M. (2019). Motivation and testing writing: A brief review of literature. The Literacy Trek, 5(1), 37-48.
• Granger, S. (2009). The contribution of learner corpora to second language acquisition and foreign language teaching: A critical evaluation. Corpora and Language Teaching, 33(13). https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.33.04gra
• Hartshorn, K. J., Evans, N. W., Merrill, P. F., Sudweeks, R. R., Strong‐Krause, & Anderson, N. J. (2010). Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy. Tesol Quarterly, 44(1), 84-109. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.213781
• Hsu, C. H. (2013). Revisiting causes of grammatical errors for ESL teachers. Educational Research, 4(6), 513-516.
• James, C. (1998). Exploring error analysis: Errors in language learning and use. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315842912
• Kadan, Ö. F. (2023). An analysis of Turkish EFL students’ writing errors. Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, 5(2), 598-609. https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1352815
• Kazazoğlu, Semin. (2020). The Impact of L1 Interference on Foreign Language Writing: A Contrastive Analysis. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(3), 1177-1188. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.803621
• Kırkgöz, Y. (2010). An analysis of written errors of Turkish adult learners of English. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4352-4358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.692
• Kırmızı, O., & Karci, B. (2017). An investigation of Turkish higher education EFL learners’ linguistic and lexical errors. Educational Process: International Journal, 6(4), 35-54. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2017.64.3
• Köroğlu, Z. Ç. (2014). An analysis on grammatical errors of Turkish EFL students’ written texts. Electronic Turkish Studies, 9(12), 101-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.7415
• Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Prentice Hall.
• Lado, R. (1957). Contrastive analysis: An overview. Academia of education. Language Acquisition, 33, 305-328.
• Lennon, P. (2008). Contrastive analysis, error analysis, interlanguage. In Bielefeld Introduction to Applied Linguistics. A Course Book. Bielefeld: Aisthesis Verlag, 51-60.
• Myhill, D. A., Jones, S. M., Lines, H., & Watson, A. (2012). Re-thinking grammar: The impact of embedded grammar teaching on students’ writing and students’ metalinguistic understanding. Research Papers in Education, 27(2), 139-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2011.637640
• Mede, E., Tutal, C., Ayaz, D., Çalışır, K. N., & Akın, Ş. (2014). The effects of language transfer in Turkish EFL learners. ELT Research Journal, 3(2), 70-83.
• Norrish, J. (1983). Language learners and their errors. Macmillan.
• Özcan, M. (2012). Novelist calls out poemist: A psycholinguistic and contrastive analysis of the errors in Turkish EFL learners-interlanguage. International Journal of Cognitive and Language Sciences, 6(8), 2311-2322. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1057597
• Özışık, C. (2014). Identifying preposition errors of Turkish EFL students. ELT Research Journal, 3(2), 59-69.
• Özkayran, A., & Yilmaz, E. (2020). Analysis of higher education students’ errors in English writing Tasks. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 11(2), 48-58. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.11n.2p.48
• Şahin, M. K. (1993). Error analysis of tense and aspect in the written English of Turkish students. Doctoral Dissertation, Bilkent University.
• Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209–231. De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209
• Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues, and directions in ESL. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 11-23). Cambridge University Press.
• Şimşek, S. (1989). A contrastive error analysis on the written errors of Turkish students learning English. Doctoral Dissertation, Bilkent University.
• Sürüç Şen, N. S., & Şimşek, A. (2020). An analysis of Turkish students’ written errors: A case of an EFL context. Journal of Language Research, 4(1), 58-68.
• Taşçı, S., & Aksu Ataç, B. (2018). Written grammatical errors of Turkish adult learners of English: An Analysis. Journal of International Social Sciences Education, 4(1), 1-13.
• Taşkıran, A., & Goksel, N. (2022). Automated feedback and teacher feedback: Writing achievement in learning English as a foreign language at a distance. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 120-139. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1096260
• Türnük, T., & Aydın, S. (2020). Interlanguage effect on writing anxiety in a foreign language context. The Literacy Trek, 6(1), 1-19.
• Ürkmez, S. (2014). Article use in the compositions by Turkish EFL learners. Contemporary Educational Researches Journal, 4(1), 11-16.
• Weaver, C. (1998). Lessons to share on teaching grammar in context. Boynton/Cook.
• Xavier, C. A., Hong, H. M., & Renandya, W. A. (2020). Grammar in writing: Teachers’ reflections. Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 60, 199-221. https://doi.org/10.58837/chula.pasaa.60.1.7
• Yüksel, G. (2007). Grammatical errors in the compositions written by Turkish learners of English (Master's thesis, Social Sciences Institute).
• Zhong, X., & Wakat, G. (2023). Enhancing grammar proficiency of EFL learners through corpus-integrated lessons. Ampersand, 11, 100139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2023.100139