SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Language Research / 2024 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2

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

Merve Gazioğlu(ABDULLAH GUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-9065-6801
Selami Aydın(Istanbul Medeniyet University)0000-0003-1614-874X
Pages
91–106
Publication Date
2024-12-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The study also showed no significant progress for Level 2 learners while Level 3 learners slightly improved by rectifying the number of errors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Foreign language learners of English have difficulty in applying grammar rules in writing despite prolonged training focusing on grammar.
📊
Key Findings & Data: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.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study also showed no significant progress for Level 2 learners while Level 3 learners slightly improved by rectifying the number of errors.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Corpus Linguistics · error analysis · grammatical errors

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.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gazioğlu, M., Aydın, S. (2024). Identifying Grammatical Errors and Mistakes via a Written Learner Corpus in a Foreign Language Context. Journal of Language Research, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 91–106. https://doi.org/10.51726/jlr.1553484

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (50)

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. Ayar, Z. (2020). Error analysis of Turkish learners’ English paragraphs from lexical and grammatical aspects. ELT Research Journal, 9(2), 123-134.
  5. 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.
  6. Botley, S. P. (2015). Errors versus mistakes: A false dichotomy? Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 11(1), 81-94.
  7. Burnard, L. (2005). Metadata for corpus work. In M. Wynne (Ed.), Developing linguistic corpora: A guide to good practice (pp. 30-46). Oxbow Books.
  8. 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
  9. Cawley, V. D. (2017). Contextualized grammar instruction: A case study of Master's students' Writing Development. Doctoral Dissertation, Judson University.
  10. Celce‐Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar pedagogy in second and foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 459-480.
  11. 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
  12. Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. Dagdeviren, G. (2010). Use of English articles by speakers of Turkish in the EFL setting. Novitas-ROYAL, 4(2), 242-250.
  14. 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
  15. Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. Oxford University Press.
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. Gazioğlu, M. (2019). Motivation and testing writing: A brief review of literature. The Literacy Trek, 5(1), 37-48.
  20. 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
  21. 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
  22. Hsu, C. H. (2013). Revisiting causes of grammatical errors for ESL teachers. Educational Research, 4(6), 513-516.
  23. James, C. (1998). Exploring error analysis: Errors in language learning and use. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315842912
  24. 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
  25. 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
  26. 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
  27. 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
  28. 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
  29. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Prentice Hall.
  30. Lado, R. (1957). Contrastive analysis: An overview. Academia of education. Language Acquisition, 33, 305-328.
  31. Lennon, P. (2008). Contrastive analysis, error analysis, interlanguage. In Bielefeld Introduction to Applied Linguistics. A Course Book. Bielefeld: Aisthesis Verlag, 51-60.
  32. 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
  33. 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.
  34. Norrish, J. (1983). Language learners and their errors. Macmillan.
  35. 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
  36. Özışık, C. (2014). Identifying preposition errors of Turkish EFL students. ELT Research Journal, 3(2), 59-69.
  37. 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
  38. Şahin, M. K. (1993). Error analysis of tense and aspect in the written English of Turkish students. Doctoral Dissertation, Bilkent University.
  39. 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
  40. 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.
  41. Şimşek, S. (1989). A contrastive error analysis on the written errors of Turkish students learning English. Doctoral Dissertation, Bilkent University.
  42. 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.
  43. 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.
  44. 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
  45. Türnük, T., & Aydın, S. (2020). Interlanguage effect on writing anxiety in a foreign language context. The Literacy Trek, 6(1), 1-19.
  46. Ürkmez, S. (2014). Article use in the compositions by Turkish EFL learners. Contemporary Educational Researches Journal, 4(1), 11-16.
  47. Weaver, C. (1998). Lessons to share on teaching grammar in context. Boynton/Cook.
  48. 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
  49. Yüksel, G. (2007). Grammatical errors in the compositions written by Turkish learners of English (Master's thesis, Social Sciences Institute).
  50. 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