Error Analysis of Bahrani Students

8/16/2019 Error Analysis of Bahrani Students

1/54

Page1


2/54

ContentsAbout the Author...................................................................................................3

Introduction........................................................................................................... 3

L1 & L2 writing.......................................................................................................5

Error Analysis.........................................................................................................7

Transfer..................................................................................................................

Literacy re!iew....................................................................................................12

"ethodology........................................................................................................ 1#

$esults and discussion.........................................................................................23

Transfer hy%othesis..............................................................................................3

'ase studies and suggestions which ha!e or are li(ely to wor(..........................37

'onclusion........................................................................................................... )*otes................................................................................................................... )

+ibliogra%hy.........................................................................................................1

A%%endi,..............................................................................................................

Page2


3/54

About the Author

I ha!e s%ent se!eral years teaching Arabic -rst language s%ea(ers at and around

undergraduate le!el. "y e,%erience with these students has seen e teach in the /.0.

Libya audi Arabia and at the tie of writing this dissertation +ahrain. uring the

4ourney with the I ha!e e,%erienced their struggles and tribulation of learning English

not least their atte%ts but often failures to write with 4ust the ost basic %ro-ciency in

English. It is for those students who ha!e sha%ed e as a teacher that I atte%t in this

%a%er to recognise why it was so tough for us to achie!e that which we ost desired and

wor(ed so hard for.

Introduction

6riting holds great signi-cance in the AngloAerican world and this is e!ident in its

dee% roots in +ritish and Aerican culture and history 8$eichelt et al. 2)129. The

in:uence of these two countries %olitically econoically and historically has created a

need for a world language and thus an ability to write in English. ;owe!er such a

culture of writing is not a worldwide tradition and unfortunately for Arabic s%ea(ers one

not %re!alent in their ci!ilisation. Arabic s%ea(ers are not a %ariah in the language world

because of their lac( of allegiance to writing any other nations share a ore !ocally

orientated language. i & Ahad 2)129. *e!erthelessEnglish does ha!e a fre?uently used syste one that is well de!elo%ed and co%le, and

for a learner to succeed in the ac?uisition of the language the writer belie!es that

astery of it ust be an ob4ecti!e. "oreo!er the success of an o!erall co%etence in

English is de%endent u%on a good foundation in writing %rowess because of the %rocess

in!ol!ed in ac?uiring such s(ills.

The dissiilarity for Arabic s%ea(ers is not 4ust a di@erence in attitude towards writing. As

the reader is li(ely to be aware of on the surface le!el Arabic and English are not in the

sae orthogra%hic neighbourhood 8aigh & chitt n.d.9. They do not share siilar lines

of thought or %osses the sae tense systes which are also coonly e!ident in

reading a %iece of writing co%osed by an Arabic s%ea(er. Although such di@erences are

clearly not uni?ue to Arabic and English the lac( of %ro-ciency in general by Arabic

s%ea(ers writing in English is indeed and ?uantitati!e data is a!ailable to see the

%henoenon which co%ares the writing abilities of Arabic s%ea(ers in English with

those fro other languages.

Page3


4/54

"y own research into the IELT test during 2)12 shed light on the e,treity of Arabic

s%ea(ers lac( of %ro-ciency in English writing s%eci-cally acadeic writing. IELT has

collocated data on all their test ta(ers and of ) -rst language bac(grounds recorded

Arabic has the 4oint lowest score for writing 8. 9 with />be( 8IELT.org 2)119. This

%ro-ciency ga% is obser!able when teaching classes consisting of both Arabic and non

Arabic students. As a co%lient to the e!idence found on the IELT website and the

bac(ground reading for this dissertation a seistructured inter!iew has been conductedwith a sall grou% of +ahraini teachers of English this focussed on the diBculties

students faced with writing and how these teachers dealt with the. Their feedbac( has

hel%ed to focus this research and -eld of literature for this %a%er and a closer loo( at the

?ualitati!e data is %resented later with the data fro an error analysis conducted for this

%a%er.

Although there is a ultitude of research that has been conducted on Arabic students

and their %robles with English there is a co%elling lac( of theory and agreeent in

the -eld. "oreo!er a large %ro%ortion of the literature a!ailable is based u%on old theory

and uch is lac(ing in acadeic rigour. Three core areas of agreeent see to be

e!ident though that of Arabic s%ea(ersC wea(nesses in writing teachersC inability tocater for these in the Arabic s%ea(ing world and the idea that %ractice of writing does not

necessarily e?uate to i%ro!eents in writing ade%tness in the case of the Arabic

s%ea(er. Therefore this %a%er atte%ts to bring together research that has been

conducted in the -eld of second language writing teaching. It loo(s at %re!ious -ndings

on the ty%ical writing errors %roduced by Arabic s%ea(ers and re:ects u%on language

transfer to see if answers for these inaccuracies lying there. The %a%er will also loo( at

strategies e%loyed by Arabic students writing in English.


5/54

L1 & L2 writing

As entioned %re!iously there is still a lac( of co%rehensi!e theory based u%on L2

writing which is ob!ious e!en ore so with the Arabic s%ea(er learning English. oe

researchers fault a belief that -rst language 8L1 fro this %oint on9 learning is the sae

%rocess as that of second language learning 8L2 fro this %oint onwards9 8il!a 139.

The conse?uence of such reasoning is that uch L2 research which has been used is

highly de%endent u%on L1 research 8"yles 2))29. The writer feels due to the diBculty in

conducting longitudinal co%rehensi!e studies on L2 students this %attern of L1

de%endence is li(ely to continue for soe tie in soe studies but already L2 research is

gaining inde%endence and this study is a (ey e,a%le.

L1 and L2 writing ay a%%ear fairly siilar on the surface le!el li(e the co%osing

%rocess as students writing in L1 and L2 will go through %lanning writing and re!ising

stages. 8il!a 139 ;owe!er if one loo(s dee%er into this %rocess it can be seen thatthere is indeed big di@erences. ha!e to wor( uch harder when co%osing in L2

because they ha!e to deal with linguistic functions which ha!e becoe autoatic in their

L1. 6riters tend to get -,ated on the local areas of a te,t li(e s%elling graar and

word order and as a result neglect the ore global areas of the te,t li(e rhetoric

coherence and the o!erall use of cohesi!e ties 8il!a 139 8"yles 2))29. They also

tend to ta(e uch ore tie in co%osing their te,ts and %roduce writings which

des%ite the longer ties and shorter than those %roduced in their L1. Again this a%%ears

to be due to their -,ation on the local areas of their te,t but also %erha%s due to less

%lanning beforehand 8il!a 139. 6hen one considers the linguistic co%le,ities of

writing in a second language it is easy to see how a lac( of %lanning will a@ect the

studentCs writing ability. "oreo!er the reader ay agree that such additional focus when

writing in L2 creates a uch ore arduous tas( which in contrast to a creati!e and

e,%ressi!e underta(ing in L1. Therefore it is clear that L1 and L2 writing are not identical

%rocesses to go through for a learner.

It also a%%ears that the %assion for lower le!el focus by the students ay be a direct

result of in:uence fro their teachers. "uch has been written about s%eci-c graatical

and le,ical areas but little in -eld of rhetoric and other global le!el issues. "oreo!er the

writer has e,%erienced as a teacher of English that his colleagues are also highly

focused on graar and s%elling areas of studentsC writing. It ay be that dealing with

lower le!el areas of writing are easier for the teacher and student and uch oreob4ecti!ely recogni>ed. The reader ay ha!e also e,%erience that any students are

highly a%%reciati!e of graatical and le,ical feedbac( on their writing and that such

feedbac( a%%ears to be ore e@ecti!e than ore in de%th feedbac( relating to rhetoric

coherence and cohesion. "yles 2))2 also writes that she feels that students a%%reciate

feedbac( on their graar and s%elling but that other researchers li(e 8$obb et al

Page5


6/54

1#=9 feel that is in the studentCs interest not to focus on these areas as these i%ro!e

with writing %ractice. It is the writerCs o%inion that this is also true but caution ust be

raised as there is also the ris( or fossili>ation the ter used when an error has fossilised

in the students %roduction and sees not to be recti-able occurring if learners are not

guided away fro their ista(es. It is e!ident therefore that the teacher %lays a highly

i%ortant role in L2 writing and ay e!en hold the (ey to success or failure for their

students.

As entioned %re!iously the teacher holds soe res%onsibility in de!elo%ing a studentCs

L2 writing. The teacherCs role in a class is to foster learning and de!elo% %ro-ciency

which will both lead to better writers. In this section it was also discussed that L2 writers

%erha%s focus too uch on their lower le!el writing areas but this is ine!itable until such

things as graar and s%elling ha!e becoe ore autoatic. Autoaticity as the by

%roduct of higher %ro-ciency is argued to result in a ore :uent and con-dent writer

who can then turn their attention to the global areas of writing 8"yles 2))29.

As has been entioned in this section there e,ist soe siilarities in L1 and L2 writing

on su%er-cial le!els ?uite coonly. In contrast there can also be dee%er le!el siilarityon soe occasions.


7/54

Error Analysis

Error analysis fro now on EA is a ethod of categori>ing and analysing errors which

ha!e been ade. It is a tool which can shed light on i%ortant learner %robles and hel%

to forulate theories about addressing the errors which learners a(e. Ellis states that

EA is concerned ore with learner language as o%%osed to nati!e or target language 8*L

& TL9. EA can be classi-ed as either in strong for where one can %redict errors which a

student will a(e based u%on %re!ious EA or it can be regarded as the wea( for where

one can e,%lain the reason of errors %ostorte. ;owe!er the latter for of EA cannot

%redict what errors will occur fro certain learners 4ust state reasons why they ha!e

occurred 8Abushihab et al. 2)119. +oth the strong and wea( !ersions can also be

classi-ed as either theoretical or %ractical with the latter being used for reedial wor(

and the forer for research %ur%oses 8Abushihab et al. 2)119.

6ith such a big area of research as error analysis it is i%ortant to clarify what is eantby an error and additionally what is generally not considered an error. An error can be

regarded as a de!iationC as Ellis %uts it fro the nors of the TL. An error is soething

which is li(ely to reoccur in the learnersC %roduction as they do not ha!e the ca%abilities

or (nowledge to be able to correct the. oeties these errors can be %roduced in an

o!ert anner where it is easy to see the fault but it ay not be as easy to notice what

Ellis 1 calls co!ertC errors an error which is only noticeable within a gi!en conte,t.

"oreo!er these errors are ore li(ely to be issed by students when re!iewing their

wor(. In such a case it would be e,treely diBcult for an error analyst to distinguish

whether the co!ert error is an error or 4ust a ista(e discussed later which has not been

noticed 8Abiara 2))39. In contrast to errors we ha!e ista(es which can also be due

to any reasons but are usually the result of carelessness or lac( of attention. These

ista(es can ty%ically be recti-ed by the %roducer and are often tered as a sli% of the

tongue. 6ith reference to writing a ista(e can be corrected if the writer has the tie

and s(ills to re!iew his or her wor( 8Abushihab et al. 2)119.

*ow that an error has been de-ned in contrast with a ista(e it is i%ortant to brea(

down the ty%es of errors which ay be found. "any error analysts recogni>e that errors

are the conse?uence of two ain categories howe!er there is not a de-nite general

consensus Intralingual or soeties tered de!elo%ental are one ty%e which can be

de-ned as an error resulting fro rule learning or to %ut it another way the incorrect

learning or o!er generalising of rules. Interlingual or soeties referred to asinterferences are another which occurs fro one language to another but does not

always e?uate an error. In such a case it would be regarded as a %ositi!e transfer 8Ellis

19 8Fohnson 2))#9 8Abiara 2))39 and this will be discussed in ore de%th in the

ne,t section. These two cases for errors are e,%anded in ulay and +urt in Abiara

2))3 where they add a third category of abiguous and a fourth of uni?ue which caters

Page


8/54

for those which do not -t the other categories. In an intro to foreign language learning

and teaching 0eith Fohnson gi!es us one further and interesting error category which is

the learner created error. ;e states in his creati!e construction theory that soe errors

can neither be attributed to intra or interlingual roots and ust ha!e in fact been

created wholly in the ind of the student. A -nal and %erha%s contro!ersial error to be

discussed in this section is that generated by the teacher. uch an error can be fossili>ed

within a student should their teacher or course %ro!ide the incorrect or uncleartuition. Although only brief in conte,t the errors laid out here re%resent the ost

coon categories in current ties.

;a!ing so any categories for errors a(e the a%%ear to be soe (ind of sic(ness for a

student and ay gi!e the i%ression that they are to be a!oided at all costs. This

howe!er is not the case as they can %ro!e to be one of the ost useful resources one

could use to hel% students de!elo% their language 8Ellis 19. Gne of the ain reasons

that errors can %ro!e to be useful is that they are rich in inforation about the learner

and their language %ro-ciency 8*a>i & Ahad 2)129. They can be used as tools to hel%

us deterine what needs ore %ractice what needs ore teaching and what has not

been learned. In a sense they are a window into how a language is being learned by thewriter and what is going on inside their ind 8Abiara 2))39 8Fohnson 2))#9. Gnce a

ta,onoy has been created for a grou% of learners it can then be used as a ethod of

heightening students awareness of their own errors and then be used during re!ising and

redrafting %hases to facilitate learning 8Tahaineh 2)1)9

Page!


9/54

"rans#er

The conce%t of errors has been discussed and what is ore it a%%ears that the -rst

language of a learner has a huge role to %lay by for of interference. $esearchers such

as 8Tahaineh 2)1)9clai that such interference fro the other tongue is the ost

fre?uent origin of errors %roduced by learners when they write. 0haldieh 2))) also

su%%orts this idea and directly relates transfer to de!elo%ental %robles in writing due

to the !ariations between oneCs L1 and L2. Therefore for the bene-t of this %a%er it is

i%ortant to e,%lore what this ter transferC actually is and how it relates to the errors

it is blaed for fostering. In this section the writer will atte%t to lay forth his

understanding of the conce%t and its i%lications.

In an atte%t to hel% clarify the de-nition of transfer the writer %oints to 8Ellis 19who

brings us to the understanding that transfer cannot be loo(ed at as si%ly the transfer

fro the other tongue to the TL. ;e states that there are other factors in!ol!ed such asany other language the learner ay ha!e encountered in their life. Gther ters are gi!en

by !arious researchers in the -eld but for the sa(e of this %a%er the ter transferC will

be used but this is in reference to any transfer bac( and forth between the TL and other

languages at %lay. "uch is focused on the negati!e as%ects of transfer which can often

result in errors as entioned %re!iously. ;owe!er there is also the %ossibility %ositi!e

transfer or soeties referred to as facilitationC where transfer fro one language

actually hel%s in %roducing accurate utterances in another 8Ellis 19. In addition to

%ositi!e and negati!e transfer is transfer which results due to o!er use of rule usually

because the student has learned soething which is siilar to a rule in another

e,%erienced language so they %ur%osely a%%ly it to ore that it can cater for in the TL

8Ellis 19. The -nal area of transfer often discussed is that of a!oidance where a

student -nds soe co%le,ity in the di@erences between words or structures in the TL

and (nown languages. As a result they tend to shun e@orts to use the co%licated

structures or words in the TD altogether 8Ellis 19.

Transfer can be caused by other factors than si%ly a di@erence between the TL and

other (nown languages. A (ey e,a%le of this is de!elo%ental factors which ha!e been

%ro!en to e,%lain why di@erent %ro-ciencies of learners fro the sae language

bac(ground ha!e show signs of di@erent transfer acti!ities occurring. Therefore a learner

who is writing in English will only transfer certain eleents into the TL when they are at a

stage of ac?uisition which allows for its use. A si%le e,a encountered such graarin the TL. Ellis continues this %oint by describing this %rocess as a restructuring of

interlangauge within the student. 0lien in Ellis 1 adds a ore negati!e loo( on this

increental transfer %rocess by stating that in such a theory the ore a studentCs

%ro-ciency increases the ore li(elihood there is for transfer to occur. In fact soe

studies ha!e e!en found e!idence that transfer can e,ist e!en in the ost ad!anced of

Page$


10/54

students 8Tahaineh 2)1)9. ;owe!er there are soe clais against this which suggest

that negati!e transfer will only e,ist until the TL fors ha!e becoe norali>ed within

the studentsC re%ertoire of language 8aigh & chitt n.d.9.

Gne would be incorrect to assue that only structures and le,is can be the sub4ect of

transfer as it has also been shown that ore cogniti!e entities can also be seen

transferring into the TL. An interesting transfer occurrence is that of attitudes towardswriting in oneCs other tongue being obser!ed in learnersC o%inions of writing in the TL

8Lee 2))59. This %oint is further e,%anded by r. $uwaida when he states that a %ersonCs

beha!iour is a@ected by their -rst culture. In addition to the transfer of cultural and

attitudes one can encounter it is coonly noted that writers will transfer %rocessing

routines fro a learned language into their TL 8aigh & chitt n.d.9. An e,a%le of such

a situation which I ha!e e,%erienced is when Arabic students write English letters and

soeties whole words fro right to left. In this situation they ha!e transferred the

%rocessing of right to left fro Arabic into their %roduction of English. The sae can also

be seen in the way they a%%roach a reading tas( in class. Gther researchers ha!e claied

that soe students use their L1 understanding of o!erall coherence to hel% the

organi>e their writing in the TL. 80haldieh 2)))9

It a%%ears that a transfer of cogniti!e %rocessing or transfer of ore structural and le,ical

%arts of language ay be the result of a lac( of (nowledge and in such a case this would

e?uate to ore diBculty for the student 8"yles 2))29. The ?uestion of diBculty and its

relation to transfer will now be e,%lored. In general ters the diBculty of the TL a%%ears

to de%end on the di@erences between it and any language which the user has learned

before 8Ellis 19. There are two interesting areas of e,%ansion to this theory which

focus ore on a languages graatical structures but can also be used to describe

or%hology the -rst deals with the obser!able di@erences between languages and

focuses on ar(edness and the second concerns ore %sychological factors.

"ar(edness is the ter which is based u%on 0ranschenCs /D theory. e that ost languages share a core graar which can be referred to

has unar(ed graar. 6e use the ter unar(ed because it has not had any

additional or uni?ue rules a%%lied to it. ;owe!er when a language does a(e s%ecial

e,ce%tions and use of e,clusi!e rules which are dissiilar to what we consider the core

graar then we class this as ar(ed language. Ec(an 177 relates this idea of

ar(edness and relates it to the diBculty as%ect we entioned earlier by stating that the

ore ar(ed a rule is the ore diBcult it will be for a learner to ac?uire it which is also

an idea shared and %ro!en by other researchers 8Al0hresheh 2)1)9 8Fohnson 2))#9

8Tahaineh 2)1)9. The writer feels this is an interesting idea as fro this theory one couldstart to %redict which %arts of writing are li(ely to %ose ore %robles for students and

which can be focused on ore lightly.

The %sychological factors %lay an i%ortant %art in understanding the writerCs situation in

+ahrain and the sub4ects which will be loo(ed at later in this %a%er. According to this

Page1%


11/54

hy%othesis the closer a language is %ercei!ed to be the easier is to learn. This

%sychological distance as 0elleran 177 %uts it a@ects the aount of transferring

which can occur and not as one would assue the actual distance of a language an

idea shared by ;u,ley 8;u,ley 1#=9. ;owe!er in the case of the Arabic s%ea(er there

a%%ears to be both an actual distance and a %sychological distance at %lay. ;owe!er this

distance is relati!e to the entality of the student and the ore cofortable he or she is

with a language and the ore %ro-cient they becoe the ore they ay associate withit and as a result the %sychological distance is li(ely to change 8Ellis 19.

6e ha!e discussed that there a%%ears to be an eleent of diBculty and ease with which

students can learn a language and this leads us into the theory of contrasti!e analysis

8'A9 to loo( at a(ing %redictions. Gne can hy%othesise as any contrasti!e analysts

do that by chec(ing the ar(edness and transfer %atterns of the two languages one can

a(e %redictions as to the ease with which students will learn an eleent of language

8r. 0han 2)119 8Fohnson 2))#9 8Ellis 19. This ty%e of thin(ing is referred to as the

strong 'A theory. ;owe!er such a theory sees not to hold water as learners still a(e

errors with ites which would be deeed easy and deal with ease ites which would

otherwise be classed as ore diBcult 8Fohnson 2))#9. Therefore an alternati!e haseerged which is the wea( !ersion of 'A and a way of loo(ing retros%ecti!ely at the

causes of errors. ;owe!er 'A has not had an easy ride in the linguistics circle with any

linguists ?uestioning the factual basis of the strong !ersions and the tie s%ent on the

wea( !ersion. It a%%ears ne!ertheless that 'A in soe for has ade a coebac( in

odern ties.

The %ros%ect of using 'A to hel% build %redictions about errors students a(e is an

i%ortant %ros%ect. It is widely acce%ted that of all the errors a@ected by transfer

%honological and le,ical are the ost %rone 8Ellis 19 8Fohnson 2))#9.


12/54

Literacy reiew


13/54

Another ore global orientated area of writing research loo(s at the organi>ation of a

te,t and this is an area where ost Arabic writers of English fail to ful-l the ty%ical

re?uireents. 'oherence in English writing ters is used by linguistics to describe the

o!erall organi>ation of a te,t. It is concerned with ha!ing to%ic su%%orting and

concluding sentences to for a logical %aragra%h of the sae to%ic. "oreo!er each

%aragra%h ust be an introduction a su%%orting idea or a concluding %aragra%h of the

te,t or cha%ter it is in. Dood use of such coherence gi!es the te,t linear %rogression andas entioned in the %re!ious %aragra%h is essential to English writing. 'ohesion on the

other hand is used to describe the ties between sentences and %hrases and hel%s to hold

a %aragra%h and ine!itably the te,t as a whole together 8ith 1#9. Gne of the (ey

as%ects to Arabic cohesion on the other hand is that it is conte,t based as in it relies on

the te,t as a whole to a(e sense. "oreo!er it a(es use of re%etition to (ee% the :ow

of ideas going through the te,t and uses ore nonadditi!e cohesion than English does

8Ahed 2)1)9. Arabic also a(es use of coordinating con4uncti!e ties instead of le,ical

ties which are ore coon in ad!anced le!el English writing 8il!a 139. The result of

the di@erences can !ery easily lead to the inability to organi>e te,ts in a way which

re%resents norality for English writing and it a%%ears that this is an all too coon

occurrence with Arabic writers 8*a>i & Ahad 2)129 8Ahed 2)1)9. In English it is

!ital to consider oneCs reader and this is !ery uch the reasoning behind scul%ting te,ts

which are well organi>ed and easy to follow for an English s%ea(er. Each %aragra%h is

carefully constructed to introduce ideas se?uentially and in the linear fashion entioned

8ith 1#9 ;owe!er in the case of Arabic 'oherence and 'ohesion 8' & '9 being

a%%lied to English writing the consideration for the reader has been neglected and as

ith %uts it the writer a%%ears to be writing for thesel!es.

Gnce one !eers fro the ore global areas of English and Arabic writing and

in!estigates dee%er into the languages the di@erence between the article systes is a

clear area of interest.


14/54

the writers. 8Abushihab et al. 2)119 8'ro%ton 2)119 /sually an Arabic student will

erroneously use the inde-nite article in %lace of the inde-nite which is a for of

interference occurring due to their L1 article syste. ;owe!er 'ro%ton also found that

the use of the de-nite article where there should be a >ero article was the ost coon

aongst his sub4ects 8'ro%ton 2)119. Although %erha%s one of the ost fre?uent ty%e

of written error for Arabic learners of English writing it is not the only (ind and one of the

other ost fre?uent will be discussed ne,t.

Gne of the ost fre?uent occurrences of errors which Arabic learners a(e when writing

in English is that of %re%ositions. The fre?uency of these errors has been well noted in

the Arabic s%ea(ing world by researchers loo(ing into the root causes in search of

solutions 8Tho%sonHanos & Thoas$uiJ 1#39 8wan & ith 2))19 8il!a 139. In

fact soe researchers ha!e gone so far as to say that %re%ositions account for the

a4ority of errors 82= of those encountered9 which students a(e in Fordan when

writing in English 8Abushihab et al. 2)119. This %oint is agreed by Tahaineh who states

that %re%ositions were the ost %robleatic for students e!en at the !ery ad!anced

stage. ;e e,%ands the inforation further a %resents the ost %robleatic %re%ositions

for Arabs as in on to with of fro for and at 8Tahaineh 2)1)9. the two facts thatArabic %re%ositions can hold eaning on their own 8wan & ith 2))19 and that soe

Arabic %re%ositions can ha!e ulti%le e?ui!alents in English 8Tahaineh 2)1)9 go soe

way to showing that astery of %re%ositional use in English is a diBcult tas( for Arabic

s%ea(ers. ;owe!er with the (nowledge of which %re%ositions %ose the ost diBculties

one can atte%t to deal with the issue in a %edagogical sense.

Two of the ost coon errors %roduced by Arabs writing in English ha!e been

discussed and the writer will atte%t to bring together ideas and results regarding other

le,ograatical errors where oission is coonly found. Arabic is a language which

a(e no use of co%ulas 8the !erb be9 au,iliary for ?uestions 8do does etc9 and uses

%articles to hel% for negati!e sentences 8wan & ith 2))19 8Tho%sonHanos &

Thoas$uiJ 1#39. The result for the learning in ?uestion is the %roduction of any

incorrect utterances due to the sheer !olue of situations which these graatical units

are re?uired in English. The oission of these is seen throughout all %ro-ciency le!els

e!en u% to the ore ad!anced le!el students 8Tho%sonHanos & Thoas$uiJ 1#39.

;owe!er at such le!els if the students are as( to re!iew their wor( they should be able

to recogni>e the oission and %ut the correct word but this is not guaranteed so one

cannot classify this as 4ust a ista(e 8note the di@erences entioned earlier9. "uch the

sae they will forgot or isuse %unctuation ?uite often.


15/54

ca%ital letters either because they do not (now how to use the or they do not

recogni>e its need 8Abiara 2))39 8*a>i & Ahad 2)129. Gne ight also -nd an

oission of discourse ar(ers in a studentCs writing and this is highly li(ely to be the

result of the di@erence in cohesi!e de!ices which the two languages in ?uestion use.

*e!ertheless it is still an e,treely i%ortant area of English writing and a tool to guide

the reader through the te,t. 8wan & ith 2))19 A lac( of discourse ar(ers is not the

only le,ical oission which is coon in Arabs English writing there is a general lac( ofle,ical richness in ost te,ts 8Ahed 2)1)9 8*a>i & Ahad 2)129.

The area of oission is indeed an area of concern for Arab writers of English but addition

can also %ose %robles as was seen earlier when students a(e use of the de-nite

article in a %lace where there should be a >ero. $elati!e clauses are di@erent in English

and Arabic and In Arabic it is a %art of the structure to ha!e the %ronoun in the second

%art of the clause but in English this brea(s the rules of the graar 8wan & ith

2))19. It was also stated earlier that Arabic is a language which a(es use of

coordination and so the relati!e clause in Arabic a(es no use of a coa to aintain

strength through the sentence. Therefore the result of a %ronoun in the second clause in

English 8Tho%sonHanos & Thoas$uiJ 1#39 and the oission or a coa and useof coordination a%%ears to be the result of negati!e transfer fro Arabic 8Abiara

2))39.

oe of the ost coon features of Arabic s%ea(er errors when writing in English ha!e

been %resented abo!e but there are other ty%es of errors which ha!e been noted by

researchers. "abal 1#) stated that there is a %roble for Arabic s%ea(ers with sub4ect

and !erb agreeent. i

& Ahad 2)129 8wan & ith 2))19. Arabs students are also highly li(ely to a(e

errors with graar and %hrases of obligation. This is because of a di@erence in the

eaning that soe English obligation words ha!e in Arabic and so an eleent of

interference can be seen as a %otential root course of the errors. 8;u,ley 1#=9 Therearea of tense errors is one not uni?ue to Arab writers of English but it is one which %oses

soe diBculty for the students 8Abushihab et al. 2)119 8*a>i & Ahad 2)129 as there

is a di@erent %ast tense to English and there is not future tense as they a(e use of a

%resent tense to tal( about the future. 8wan & ith 2))19In fact Arabic writing

focuses on tie by for of ad!erbial clauses and usually %laces these at the beginning

Page15


16/54

of a sentence and hel%s to aintain their focus of tie -rst and then %lace and -nally

action 8Tho%sonHanos & Thoas$uiJ 1#39.

The area of le,is and synta, %ose great diBculty to Arabic learners of English in general

and this a%%lies es%ecially to their written %roduction. ;owe!er it can be argued that 4ust

as %robleatic as these areas is the area of %honetics and s%elling. If the reader has

e,%erienced teaching Arabic students they are li(ely to be all too aware of the ?uantityand %ersistence of s%elling errorsista(es. uch an insight is re:ected in the research

conducted on Arabic s%ea(ers around the world 8Tho%sonHanos & Thoas$uiJ 1#39

8;u,ley 1#=9 8r. 0han 2)119 8Abushihab et al. 2)119 8*a>i & Ahad 2)129 8aigh

& chitt n.d.9 8Ahed 2)1)9 and has been found in con4unction with alost all of the

errors discussed abo!e.


17/54

big di@erence in the !ocabulary and graar between the two dialects 8Tho%sonHanos

& Thoas$uiJ 1#39 and soe would go so far as to say that collo?uial Arabic is

absent of graar. 6hat is ore both of these dialects a%%ear to ha!e an i%act of

Arabic students writing %erforance 8Abiara 2))39. ;owe!er it ay be that "A has

a bigger in:uence on the written %roduction of Arabic s%ea(ers 8Al0hresheh 2)1)9.

'eelo()ental s* trans#er

6hether the errors obser!ed in the studies %resented are truly the result of transfer is a

diBcult ?uestion to answer whether they are de!elo%ental is soewhat easier. oe

studies ha!e noted that de!elo%ental errors outnuber those of transfer 8Abiara

2))39 8Fohnson 2))#9 and this suggests that transfer ay only %lay a sall role in

inhibiting studentsC astery of English. ;owe!er the conclusions on transfer far

outweigh those I was able to gather on de!elo%ental errors.

Transfer sees to ha!e soe in:uence on error %roduction. In fact se!eral researchers

ha!e concluded that it is the ain facilitator of errors and is ore e@ecti!e than

de!elo%ental 8Tahaineh 2)1)9 8Ahed 2)1)9. Gn the other hand others ha!e

claied that it results in the %roduction of a large nuber of errors 8'ro%ton 2)119

8Abiara 2))39. In her study *ada was able to calculate that one third of all errors

%roduced by the students were down to interference 8Abiara 2))39.

*egati!e transfer was shown to be hea!ily salient in uch of the research into Arabs

writing %robles in English. Ahed 2)1) clearly states that Arabic negati!ely interfered

with his sub4ectsC writing. "oreo!er it a%%ears a select grou% of interfered with ites can

be selected fro the studies loo(ed at.


18/54

G!erall it sees that there is an interesting lin( between errors and transfer be it

%ositi!e or negati!e and that this a%%ears in all %ro-ciencies of Arabic learners of English

writing but that lower le!els are %erha%s the ost %rone due to a lac( of (nowledge.

8Fohnson 2))#9 It ay 4ust be that transfer is an ine!itable %art of language learning

8'ro%ton 2)119 8Ellis 19 and that students will ha!e to learn how to a,ii>e the

%ositi!es and neutrali>e the negati!es as uch as %ossible.

Page1!


19/54

+ethodology,ualitatie ,uantitatie data analysis

Nualitati!e data analysis is usually conducted by eans of a ?uestionnaire inter!iew or

focus grou%. It is a tool which will be able to hel% a researcher for a theory but is

unli(ely to result in data which can be coded and ha!e statistics a%%lied to it 8$asinger

2)119. ;owe!er it is an e,cellent eans to see %atterns and can be used to de!elo%

theory and sha%e future ?uantitati!e research. Le!ron 82)119 su%%orts this use of

?ualitati!e data analysis and states that it a(es good bac(u% data and that any

acadeics feel that it is best used at the beginning of a conduct of research.

Nualitati!e data analysis has been used in this %a%er to for the theory u%on which it is

based that Arabic s%ea(ers %roduce the sae ty%e of written errors. To get to this as

entioned in the introduction a seistructured inter!iew was used with a grou% of

+ahraini teachers of English. These teachers were diBcult to gain access to and their

tie was !ery !aluable which is why it was decided to hold a discussion session. It wasalso assued that a +ahraini teacher would ha!e a di@erent %ers%ecti!e of student errors

than a nati!e English teacher and so a di@erent as%ect of reality could be brought to light

8Angouri 2)119. Agouri 82)119 also highlights that rich and inde%th data is attainable by

the use of such ethods.

As entioned in the %re!ious %aragra%h a seistructured ?uestionnaire was used in a

discussion setting with four +ahraini teachers of English. It was felt that by ha!ing access

to the teachers during the %rocedure any %robles could be recti-ed on the s%ot.

Although a set of ?uestions had been ty%ed and was used as the scri%t for the eeting

and hel%ed to for the agenda for the discussion. Le!ron 82)119 suggests doing such

inter!iews on occasions with grou%s which %ro!ed to be the only o%tion for the teachersin!ol!ed due to their busy schedule. This ethod also allowed the eeting to be free

:owingC and ore nature hel%ing to encourage a ore o%en discussion on the to%ic

8Le!ron 2)119. The bene-t of ha!ing +ahraini English teachers was that they were both

aware of the terinology of linguistics and teaching and of the issues facing Arabic

s%ea(ers when writing in English. Therefore there was no need to a!oid the use of

linguistic ters in the ?uestions which is usually ad!ised against 8$asinger 2)119.

The results of such an o%en ?uestion seistructured inter!iew sessions with ulti%le

candidates is that the sub4ects ay be a@ected in any ways and gi!e untrue answers.

They ay feel that they needed to gi!e answers which the researcher sees -tting

8Le!ron 2)119 and this is heightened by the fact that in this situation the researcher was

a nati!e s%ea(er and the sub4ects Arabic.


20/54

ebers and could cause a bootstra%%ingC e@ect 8Le!ron 2)119 where others bind to

their o%inions.

Nualitati!e data analysis is a tool one can use to loo( at %hysical things in a nueric

%ers%ecti!e 8$asinger 2)119. It is !ery e@ecti!e at generali>ing 8Angouri 2)119 and this

is soething which was needed to answer the research ?uestions %resented earlier and

hel% to for a hy%othesis. Essentially it is a tool for analy>ing things in a statistical wayto loo( for %atterns within the data. ;owe!er before this can be done as entioned the

%hysical entities need to be con!erted into nubers and this is done by the %rocess of

o%erationali>ation 8$asinger 2)119 8Le!ron 2)119. ;owe!er not e!erything can go

through this %rocess as we are only able to count things which are indeed countable

8Le!ron 2)119 anything else is ore than li(ely a %roduct of ?ualitati!e data which will

be discussed later. ed as a eans to dis%ro!e the null hy%othesis which is the statistical chance

that the o%%osite of the hy%othesis is true. In this study the statistical tool hel%ed to test

the null hy%othesis de!elo%ed after the ideas obtained during the -rst seistructured

inter!iew.

ata analysis can be conducted !ia a crosssectional ethod or a longitudinal one. The

forer refers to ta(ing the data sa%le once at a s%eci-c tie whereas with the latter

ulti%le sa%les are ta(ing o!er a %eriod of tie 8$asinger 2)119. Alost all of the

studies loo(ed at in the literacy re!iew concerning Arabic writer errors in English

conducted crosssectional data analysis but this %a%er has done a longitudinal study bycollecting the cor%us of writing fro idway through a course and fro the -nal e,it

e,a. +y doing this the writer is able to %ro!ide data which ay ha!e changed o!er

tie and thus show soe de!elo%ental as%ects which is !ital for discussing whether

an error is de!elo%ental or because of transfer.


21/54

essay it is a%%lied. The use of a rigorous error ta,onoy which can cater for all the

errors obser!ed is essential to aintaining reliability. The faults of other researchers

categories has been considered to hel% for a ore reliable set for the data in this %a%er

and is %resented later in this section. Oalidity can be sought if oneCs tool actually

easures that which it is intended to so in this case the data analysis ust easure

errors %roduced by writers. +y using siilar ethods to other researchers which a%%ear

to ha!e achie!ed !alidity but custoi>ing these to suit the s%eci-c circustances in thesetting soundness can ore easily been aintained. "oreo!er by using a s%lithalf test

suggested by 8$asinger 2)119 it is %ossible to co%are two sets fro the sae sa%le

of writing and see if the error ratio is siilar for both. The s%lithalf ethod has been used

to s%lit the -nal writing %iece and the earlier writings.

-etting

The Arabian Dulf /ni!ersity is a edical uni!ersity in the centre of +ahrain. It caters for a

range of edical related courses and is both 4ointly funded and %o%ulated by se!eral

Arab countries in the Dulf. 6ithin the uni!ersity there are se!en years of study for the

students to %rogress through before they graduate and begin ore s%eciali>ed trainingwithin a hos%ital. This study focuses on the -rst year of the se!en the foundation year.

This course is run o!er a tenonth %eriod during which the students study fro a boo(

called 6orld English and which consists of soe writing tas(s to co%lient the to%ics

co!ered. In order to graduate fro this foundation year the students ust attain at least

a 5.5 in the IELT test which is currently run by the +ritish council in the country. The

result of which is a hea!y focus towards IELT s(ills early on in the course.

+ahrain is an Island o@ the Arabian Heninsula in the "iddle East. The -rst language is

Arabic although with a foreign %o%ulation of 5 it is ?uestionable if Arabic is the ost

s%o(en language within the country. 8'IA 2)129 Although soe of this foreign %o%ulace is

fro Arabic countries the !ast a4ority of foreign wor(ers are fro India and Ha(istanboth of which do not use Arabic as a -rst or second language but English instead.

80arola( 2)1)2)119 Therefore there are two Arabic dialects and English being used in

the country. es%ite this +ahrain is regarded as a highly literate country with .= of

the nati!es being able to read and write after the age of 15. 8'IA 2)129 A -nal %oint

which is of i%ortance for this study is the fact that +ahrain was a %rotectorate of Dreat

+ritain for any years u% until 171 when it gained inde%endence. 8'IA 2)129

'onse?uently soe as%ects of +ritish in:uence reain within the (ingdo.

Partici(ants


22/54

!arious countries within the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), but all of whom spoke Arabic as

their first language, and had studied English for at least 8 years before they finished high school,

which is the same as what Tahaineh stated in his report also (Tahaineh, !"#")

Procedure

According to Corder, #$%&, these steps are the ones one should take when conducting EA (Ellis,

#$$&), and so this procedure was followed'

#) Collection of a sample of language learners

!) dentification of errors

) *escription of errors

&) E+planation of errors

) E-aluation of errors

(Ellis, #$$&) (Abushihab, et al, !"##)

Select corpus

.or the purpose of this study, a select corpus of writings produced o-er the two/month period has

been collected This corpus was elicited from the students by getting them to answer an E0T1 style

2uestion at the midway point in the course, and finally at the end of the course in their e+it test Ellis

regards this form of corpus building as between massi-e and selecti-e 1electi-e usually means taking

a sample of writings from a group who ha-e written about the same topic, whereas massi-e is when

multiple topics ha-e been written about by all the students, and collected from the group (Ellis, #$$&)

This has helped form a more longitudinal approach to the data collection and is in contrast to most of

the studies in this field, and those presented earlier in this paper, which make use of more selecti-e orincidental data collection

Identi.cation o# errors

In order to (ee% integrity during the research any error is regarded as a de!iation fro

the nors of the TL. 8Ellis 19 ;owe!er because the students were not inter!iew after

the writing tas(s it is unli(ely that one can say for sure that errors were truly an

erroneous act and not si%ly a ista(e which could be recti-ed. This howe!er is not a

uni?ue liitation of this study and is a coon concern in ost EA studies 8Ellis 19.

+y eans of ?uantitati!e easureents described later the chances of errors being

ade by chance can be calculated.


23/54

In order to identify the errors a ta,onoy is needed which is ade?uate and not o!erly

co%licated by subcategories which allows for a detailed descri%tion of all the errors

8Ellis 19. Therefore ulay +urt and 0raschenCs surface strategy ta,onoy has been

chosen as it best re:ects the ty%e of errors outlined in the literacy re!iew those of

oission addition and substitution which is subdi!ided as isforations and

isordering 8Ellis 19. Gission accounted for when an eleent of language had been

left out of the utterance. Addition was used to note when e,tra entities had been usedwhich should not ha!e been there. "isforation is the category for a isfored graar

rule or s%elling etc.


24/54

of the si%lest odels to use for EA and hel%s to focus ore on the as%ect of transfer.

uch a odel states that errors can be due to interference de!elo%ent or uni?ue. The

writer ac(nowledges that it is e,treely diBcult and %erha%s currently i%ossible to

distinguish with certainty that an error is the result of transfer or de!elo%ent 8Ellis

19. uch a diBculty is not uni?ue to this study


25/54

0esults and discussion

,uantitatie data results

G!erall errors reduced fro the id P%oint to the -nal writing tas( and this e,a%le oferrors declining o!er tie 8"yles 2))29 is to be e,%ected with cogniti!e de!elo%ents

and strategies being a%%lied. The a4ority of errors ade by the sub4ects in this study

were those relating to synta, and or%hology and this was seen in both the id%oint

sa%le of essays and the -nal e,it essay sa%le. The writer feels that this is to be

e,%ected due to the nuber of graatical ites being used in a ty%ical essay and the

fact that %roducing a correct graar feature ay be ore cogniti!ely co%le, than

using or s%elling a word correctly. uch high le!els of syntactical and or%hological errors

are not uni?ue to this study and Abiaara 82))39 and Tahaineh 82)1)9 re%orted siilar

distinction in their results. It is (nown that Arabic students tend to su@er when it coes

to the use of and ac?uisition of graatical functions 8r. 0han 2)119 and so thiss%eci-c -nding is not sur%rising.

Linguistic category

)

2)

)=)

#)

1))

12)

1)

1=)

1#)

2))

s& Q

or%h Q

le, Q

dis Q

Page25


26/54

igure 1 0esults #ro) the )id(oint essay EA

Linguistic category

)

2)

)

=)

#)

1))

12)

1)

s& Q

or%h Q

le, Q

dis Q

igure 2 0esults #ro) e/it test essay

Page26


27/54

)

1)

2)

3)

)

5)

=)

nu)ber o# errors

nuber of errors

igure 3 +id(oint

)

1)

2)

3)

)

5)

=)7)

#)

u)ber o# errors

*uber of errors

igure 4 inal test

Page2


28/54


29/54

failies being loo(ed at o!er the course duration. Gne of the reasons for such a !iew is

that in Arabic one word rarely has ulti%le eanings 8r. 0han 2)119 unli(e in English

where such a %ractice is widely obser!ed. It is estiated that se!eral hundred word

failies were loo(ed at in the %eriod between the two sa%les. Gne %ossible reasoning

behind this reduction of errors against what was e,%ected is that there ay ha!e been

soe %assi!e (nowledge of a lot of the word failies co!ered but that the use of the

was being a!oided or restricted due to %roducti!e (nowledge. A siilar le!el of successwas seen in a utch study where the students focused on con!erting their %assi!e

(nowledge of words into a ore acti!e and usable (nowledge so that writing could

becoe ore :uent and cofortable for the sub4ects 8Delderen et al. 2)119. Therefore

it a%%ears that the students ay ha!e (now any words when they were writing for the

-rst sa%le but that they did not (now the ade?uately and as a result ade ore

wrong word and %re%osition choices. In addition to this natural learning %rocess the

students were also being trained in %re%aration for an IELT e,a and so they were

doing lots of wor( on !ocabulary building and the use of (ey graatical structures for

IELT essays. uch wor( would also e,%lain the reduction in discourse related errors as

the students had ac?uired the correct styles needed for essay writing.

)1)

2)

3)

)

5)

=)

7)

#)

ois

add

isfor

isorder

igure 5 )id(oint errors with s(elling and gra))ar other*

Page2$


30/54

)

1)

2)

3)

)

5)

=)

ois

add

isfor

isorder

igure 6 inal test with s(elling and gra))ar other*

)

5

1)

15

2)

25

3)

ois

add

isfor

isorder

igure +id(oint s(eci.c 7no s(elling or gra))ar other*

Page3%


31/54

)2=#

1)

1211=1#2)

ois

add

isfor

isorder

igure ! inal test 7no s(elling or gra))ar other*

Punctuation

Gnce the s%elling and other graar errors are reo!ed 8see -gure 79 a two stri(ing

%ea(s are notable in the data set fro the -rst writing tas( which re%resents errors of

%unctuation in the for of oission and addition. The fact that both oission and

addition are both relati!ely high %ossibly eans that the students lac( control o!er the

use of %unctuation. This is %erha%s sur%rising as there is only a little aount of research

which states that students who use Arabic as their -rst language will a(e errors in%unctuation li(e ca%itali>ation coas etc 8*a>i & Ahad 2)1298Ibrahi 177 cited in

Al0hresheh 2)1)9. ;owe!er Abiaara 82))39 did note that errors of substance which

included %unctuation were the a4ority of errors in her study.


32/54

uch uncontrolled sentences were clearly diinished by the tie the students conducted

their -nal writing assignents as errors or both s%eci-c and generic articles sur%assed

the. 2)) in

'ro%ton 2)119. This lac( of controlled which can be seen in the data fro the last

writing res%onse shows that the students do not ha!e control o!er the use of articles aC

and anC and so they a%%ear to ha!e ulti%le hy%othesis about the use of these articles

8'ro%ton 2)119. This is des%ite the fact that they ha!e had s%eci-c focus during class

tie on this %articular error and the graar rules needed to rectify it and so it a%%ears

that soe fossili>ation has occurred but there are instances of errors occurring where a

generic article has been used where is shouldnCt be. In 'ro%tonCs %a%er he notes that

of generic s%eci-c and >ero article usage the students had the wea(ness le!el of control

of generic articles 8'ro%ton 2)119.

Errors relating to s%eci-c articles a%%ear to contrast what would be e,%ected if transfer

theory was indeed true because there are signs in the data %resented that it did not occur

when it should ha!e in both sa%les. As was stated in the literacy re!iew Arabic a(es

use of the de-nite article which is re%resented as alC before alost all nouns 8wan &

ith 2))19 8'ro%ton 2)119. ;owe!er the data clearly shows that there were soe

errors of s%eci-c article oission. Gne would e,%ect all nouns written in English to ha!esoe for of article e!en if it was the incorrect one but to ha!e no article is sur%rising. It

ay be %ossible that the student had de!elo%ed a hy%othesis which tells the that the

use of a de-nite article in English is !astly di@erent to that of their own language and as

a result they are o!erco%ensating for this di@erence by lea!ing out articles. That being

said they ha!e not left their nati!e language rule for s%eci-c articles co%letely behind

in as both sa%les show that the de-nite article has been used where a >ero article

should be and what is ore this ha%%ened ore in the latter test than in the -rst %iece

of writing %roduced. 'ro%ton 2)11 found siilar occurrences where a >ero article in

English was not used correctly and instead re%laced with the de-nite article 8'ro%ton

2)119.

.

rong choice o# (re(osition

Page32


33/54

The ne,t ost signi-cantly large grou% of errors in the data is for the wrong choice of

%re%osition which occurred when students wrote went on schoolC instead of went in

schoolC. These errors ha!e been categori>ed in the le,ical and seantics grou% as their

a%%earance in writing is the result of a lac( of (nowledge of their use or collocations. The

astery of %re%osition use in English is diBcult for any foreign %erson and not 4ust Arabic

learners. English consists of 57 %re%ositions whereas Arabic a(es ore use of the 2)

%re%ositions in has in the language. 8;ayden 15= in ;abash 1#29 Hre%ositions ha!edi@erent functions which co%licate the learning %rocess 8wan 2))59. wan 82))59

further states that 4ust the %re%osition atC has 1# di@erent uses in English all of which

could be co%letely di@erent in Arabic. "oreo!er soe English %re%ositions in %hrases

ha!e no e?ui!alent in Arabic while others ha!e ulti%le e?ui!alents. In fact %re%ositions

also hold their own eaning in Arabic 8wan & ith 2))19 unli(e in English where they

need to be acco%anied by another word. Therefore the diBculty e!ident in this %a%er is

e,%ected and has been shown in other studies across the -eld 8il!a 139 8r. 0han

2)119. Gf cott and Tuc(erCs EA in Tho%sonHanos & Thoas$uiJ 1#3 found that

these errors were aong the to% four %robleatic and fre?uent for Arabic students and

this -ts with the results here. Herha%s a ore draatic reference to %re%osition errors is

%resented in Tahaineh 2)1) where 2= 8)359 errors were %re%ositional which is

substantially higher than those in this %a%er. *ot all %a%ers found large ?uantities of

%re%osition errors for e,a%le Abi aara 2))3 found a relati!ely sall %ro%ortion of

the errors in her research %re%ositions.

In addition to errors where %re%ositions were wrongly used this study found that

%re%ositions were fre?uently oitted and added to utterances with the forer being

ore %robleatic than the latter. "oreo!er this a%%eared to occur alost as uch in

both the id%oint writing and the e,it writing sa%les. uch occurrences are li(ely to be

the result of a lac( of (nowledge of the %re%ositional use in the sentence and as such are

li(ely to decrease with de!elo%ent of their language s(ills. This sees %robably asadditions of %re%ositions increased between the two sets of data here and oissions

decreased. This suggests students are gradually trying to a%%ly %re%osition rules but are

a(ing is4udgeents in their atte%ts.

Incorrect word order

It is e!ident that there was a slight decline in the total nuber of errors %roduced in the

choice of word order by the writers but there is still a %roble %resent. It sees that this

is !ery uch due to the di@erences between the way Arabic and English organi>e their

sentences. As has been entioned Arabic aintains !erb sub4ect ob4ect 8OG9 order of

constituents in a sentence 8wan & ith 2))19 but this is used ore coonly for thewritten for whereas a OG order can be a%%lied to Arabic s%eech 8Alshayban 2)129.

;owe!er word order is e,treely :e,ible in Arabic as one can also use OG and GO

with the latter be an e,treely rare way of organi>ing the %arts of a sentence and has a

fre?uency of use in the world of 4ust o!er 1 co%ared with 1.7 for OG 8"eyer

2)1)9. Gne of the reasons for such an array of sentence organi>ation is the two fors of

Page33


34/54

Arabic which are in use as discussed %re!iously. These two fors are both acti!ely

%resent in the studentsC (nowledge base and a%%ear to be causing an eleent of

interference 8Al0hresheh 2)1)9. uch rarity and i,ture is not a trait of English in fact

English is one of the ost widely s%o(en languages in the world and its OG is only

second to GO order in world use fre?uency 8"eyer 2)1)9. In their %a%er Lu%yan &

'hristiansen n.d. suggests that the success of English is down to its strict co%liance to

this order and further suggests that such -r loyalty to an order facilitates learning.English is so strict in its use that a alfored sentence of OG would %roduce soething

of co%lete inco%rehensibility li(e for e,a%le 0ic(ed "ohaed Tony. In this

e,a%le it is not clear who has done the action and therefore a(es no sense in

English. ;owe!er there are languages li(e Arabic erbo'roatian and Arabic which allow

this to occur if certain additions are ade to the words or cues used 8Lu%yan &

'hristiansen n.d.9. This di@erence in word order was (nown about before the course was

started and so the students had training in the use of OG order for English writing.

6hen co%ared to the other errors and considering the focused %aid to this %articular

area of di@erence it is interesting to note such a inial i%ro!eent. 6hat is clear

fro these results and the research and results of other linguists who ha!e studied Arabs

is that the dee% le!el thin(ing behind the two languages !ery uch di@ers. Arabic %laces

e%hasis on the action then tie and %lace before stating who did the action and this

sees to result in the use of the di@erent order. English on the other hand centres around

the %erson conducting the action -rst before e,%loring what the action is and -nal where

and when it ha%%ens. This being said English word order should not %ose great diBculty

to ac?uire as unli(e the rules for s%elling the rules of word order are rigid and so it

a%%ears soe fossili>ation is %resent in these students as they ha!e not reacted to the

additional tuition.

0elatie clauses

$elati!e clauses errors reduced substantially between the two sets of data with the initial

writing sa%le %roducing 17 cases of relati!e clause errors and the -nal writing sa%le

only accounts of such faults. The forer consisted of both oissions and additions of a

%ronoun in the second clause in the sentence whereas the latter only had errors where

an addition had been ade. uch a decline in the oission of the %ronoun whichC whoC

and thatC but a slower reduction in addition errors has already be suggested in recent

literature as a %attern which ost students go through when learning relati!e clauses

8Tho%sonHanos & Thoas$uiJ 1#39. They suggested that learning to delete rule for

the sub4ect %recedes that of the ob4ect in relati!e clauses 8Tho%sonHanos & Thoas

$uiJ 1#39. ;owe!er this general rule ay be further in:uenced by the rules go!erning

%ronouns in Arabic.


35/54

Arab student errors in English. It a%%ears that relati!e clauses are one of the ost

diBcult challenges to construct for Arab students. There is a ultitude of graatical

functions to get right before the o!erall clause is co%lete and students ha!e to ha!e

%ro-ciency in the use of word order co%ula articles and %ronouns before they can e!en

consider getting the subordination correct in the sentence. It has already been shown

that such linguistic functions already %osed substantial diBculty for the students in this

%a%er which cobined with a tendency to construct relati!e clauses in a orecoordinated style in Arabic resulted in an alost enigatic structure for any of the

writers.

Co(ula

Errors relating to co%ula usage but e,cluding fors of the %assi!e and %resent

%rogressi!e saw a reduction fro total errors ainly in oission in the -rst set of

writings to 7 errors in the second set. "oreo!er the errors in the concluding writing tas(

saw a hal!ing in the nuber of oissions and a doubling in the nuber of additions when

co%ared with the -rst set. This suggests that the writers are atte%ting to a%%ly their

hy%othesis about the use of co%ulas to their written wor( but also that they hold a wrongconce%t of the rules or that they are 4ust ine@ecti!e in their a%%lication. This is e,%ected

because as discussed %re!iously Arabic does not e%loy a co%ula in the sae way that

English does 8wan & ith 2))19. In fact Arabic uses !erbs not co%ulas to hel%

describe state in the language. The nearest e?ui!alent of the !erb be in Arabic is the !erb

(enaC but when this is used in the sae was as English uses its !erb be then

ungraatical sentences are created 8Alshayban 2)129. Alshayban 2)12 gi!es us

further (nowledge into the use of the !erb (enaC in Arabic and states that due to its use

and lac( of use in %resent tenses it is li(ely that Arabic students will succub to the

negati!e transfer and a%%ly such a rule in their English writing 8Alshayban 2)129. This

goes soeway to e,%laining the %ersistence of oissions of the co%ula in Arabs writing of

e!en ad!anced le!els of %ro-ciency and the fre?uency of it in all le!els of learners of

English fro Arabic linguistic bac(grounds 8Alshayban 2)129.

'iscourse

The area of discourse showed that soe errors could be !ery %ersistent in this %art of

language. Long sentences were less coon ty%e of error in the -rst sa%le and this is

li(ely to be due to the lac( of co%le, structures in English that the students were able to

%roduce. ;owe!er after wor( on di@erent clauses in English and ore co%le,

graatical structures the students had ore fors in their re%ertoire. Therefore the

-ndings in the last writing tas(s where errors rose fro 2 to = are not a re!elation.

ation of the Nuran and itCs rich long and co%le, structures has created the

culture of elaborate writing in the Arab world. This use of ore e,%ressi!e language in

Page35


36/54

rhetoric a%%ears to be ?uite coon in societies which are built around religion 8$ass

2)119 and such cultural nors e,%lain why in Arabic sentences are lengthier than their

English e?ui!alent and are se%arated by lots of coas and con4unctions 8wan &

ith 2))19.


37/54

,ualitatie data analysis

The seistructured inter!iew was conducted at the $oyal 'ollege of urgeons in Ireland

P +ahrain edical uni!ersity 8$'I9 and was attended by four +ahraini teachers who all

ga!e consent to their contributions being recorded for this %a%er. This %articular

uni!ersity was chosen due to its siilarities with the sub4ects in this study as it was also a

edical uni!ersity and the students were under band 5 in IELT. The inter!iew was ableto re!eal what +ahraini English teachers generally -nd in this uni!ersity when teaching

English co%osition and what strategies they e%loy to counter these %robles.

The results fro this inter!iew irror the (ind of %robles both researched about %rior to

the EA and the results seen in the EA for this %a%er. The teachers e,%ressed that article

errors were aong the ost %robleatic and %ersistent and that these errors are a result

of the students translating fro Arabic into English. They further e,%lained that this

resulted in the o!eruse of the de-nite article in the studentsC writing. This clearly irrors

what has been disco!ered here in this %a%er and what has been suggested by other

researchers but here the inforation is fro teachers in the -eld. The teachers also

e,%ressed concern with their studentsC word orders in English sentences. They stated thatnouns and !erbs are often i,ed u% and that ad!erbs are fre?uently is%laced. 6ith the

e,ce%tion of ad!erbs which were not hea!ily focused on in this study the results bare

the sae -ndings as in the EA here. The $'I sta@ here in +ahrain also articulated their

frustration and bewilderent with the state of s%elling of their students. oe e!en

suggested that the s%elling %ro-ciency was the worst they had e!er seen and that this

did not change no atter how uch %ractice the students had. The results here also

show that Arabic writers of English clearly struggle iensely in this %art of their English

use.


38/54

"rans#er hy(othesis

In order to establish if errors ha!e been ade as a result of interference fro the other

tongue of a student any researchers in this %articular -eld either used their own

linguistic (nowledge of Arabic or consulted an e,%ert these %articular o%tions were not

a!ailable for this %a%er and so the hy%othesis de!elo%ed here is based u%on -ndings inthe results here and in other %a%ers.


39/54

other languages. The diBculty though is deterining if it is truly a %articular language

which is causing errors or 4ust a case of natural de!elo%ent but as the students in this

%a%er were studying with the writer for a substantial %eriod there is a high le!el of

con-dence that any of the errors were a direct result of Arabic as%ects. *egati!e

interference has been claied in alost all of the %a%er %resented in the literature

re!iew Ahed 2)1) and Alshayban 2)12 clai it was the ain catalyst for errors in

their data. A lot of e!idence a%%ears to lay in results relating to article usage siilarly tothose %resented in this %a%erCs -nding suggesting that the article syste used in Arabic

interferes with the ability to aster the use of the English article syste 8Abushihab et

al. 2)119 8Al0hresheh 2)1)9. This was also seen in 'ro%tons %a%er where the de-nite

article was transferred ?uite coonly also was seen in the results in the -gures abo!e

into %ositions where either no article should be %laced or a generic article should be

%osition in both these cases the Arabic use of alC the s%eci-c article is clearly being

a%%lied by the students and this is des%ite the fact that reedial wor( was carried out

during the course for the students in ?uestion. Abuaara also saw a large %ercentage of

errors being the result of transfer in her study in 2))3 and she claied that these were

s%lit between interference between standard Arabic and collo?uial Arabic a !iew also

e,%ressed by "ohaed 2))) in Al0hresheh 2)1). It also a%%ears that the errors of

wrong %ro%osition choice and %re%osition errors in general %resented in the results of this

study are ainly due to transfer issues and it is %ossible that %re%ositions are an area of

linguistic ost a@ected by interlingual interference 8Al0hresheh 2)1)9 8'ro%ton

2)119. The students who wrote for this %a%er were high le!el students all %re%aring for

the -rst year of uni!ersity and achie!ing around 5.5 in the IELT e,a so the

interference of %re%ositions and articles is a %ersistent %roble for e!en ad!anced

learners 8'ro%ton 2)119 and ay ha!e fossilised in the. ;owe!er it ay not be a

%eranent situation and in general the students were able to reduce their o!erall

%roduction of errors and this is a ty%ical occurrence for higher le!el students 8Ellis 19.

The students in this %a%er were able to reduce their errors because they had ac?uiredore rules and (nowledge about the language and this hel%ed to reediate the

%robles seen in the -rst set of writings %roduced by the students. ;owe!er the

obser!ation of increases in certain error categories is a sign that the students were not

coing to an end in %roducing interference dri!en faults in their writing and it a%%ears

that with the learning of new structures and words the sco%e for further errors was

widened so one can say that the reasons soe errors were seen in the second sa%le

but not the -rst was because those structures and words were not ready to be

transferred at that %oint in tie 8Ellis 19. uch a theory follows that %resented in

0elleranCs %a%er in 15 where he %oints to the theory of natural ac?uisition an innate

order of learning that all students go through when learning a language.

Another area already said to be %rone to interlingual transfer is discourse and rhetorical

structures 8$ass 2)119 8Ellis 19 and is not liited 4ust to transfer fro Arabic into

English or !ice !ersa. It has already been entioned in this %a%er that Arabic holds a !ery

tight connection to Isla and as such the nati!e s%ea(ers -nd it diBcult to ste% away

Page3$


40/54

fro e,%ressing thesel!es in ways which are religiously and culturally doinated. The

assertion and e,aggeration discussed in the earlier %ages of this %a%er were attributed to

such culture and religious bac(grounds 4ust cited and it was deeed that religiously

doinated societies share a coon trait of this ty%e of discourse. Therefore the

rhetorical functions which were used by the students which caused unnaturally long and

ebellished setneces are the result of a strong transfer fro their other tongue. This is

a -nding which co%lients suggestions fro Tho%sonHanos & Thoas$uiJ 1#3.

Transfer sees to a@ect areas other than graar also and s%elling is %erha%s one of

the ost a@ected in this study. It has been claied in the %ast that s%elling is a@ected by

transfer due to the high le!els of %honetic le!el transfer between languages 8Ellis 19.

Therefore the %honetic nature of Arabic has clearly been a%%lied to English in an atte%t

to deal with the co%le, s%elling syste in the language. uch transfers are li(e the

graatical ones entioned in the %re!ious %aragra%h li(ely to gradually disa%%ear

fro the studentsC error %roduction because of the ac?uisition of s%elling rules and

e,ce%tions o!er tie. Therefore a %otential ?uestion is whether such errors truly are

transfer or de!elo%ental and such a ?uestion is diBcult to answer with co%ounding

resol!e but with ore studies li(e the one carried out here o!er a %eriod of tie a orede-niti!e answer ay start to eerge.

Page4%


41/54

Case studies and suggestions which hae or are li9ely to wor9

6hat is clear regardless of the cause of errors is that learners need to ha!e strategies

taught to the so that they can co%e with the %rocess of writing ore co%etently

8"yles 2))29. 6riters who a(e use of strategies to counter de!elo%ental or transfer

issues are highly li(ely to be ore %ro-cient than those who do not 80haldieh 2)))9 as

they ha!e the tools necessary to su%%ort the when such instances occur whereas those

who do not use the will ine!itably a(e decisions in uch ore haste and without

a%titude . trategies can be in the for of either direct or indirect a%%roaches. The forer

is regarded as a cogniti!e strategy 80haldieh 2)))9 where students a(e a ental e@ort

to focus on their errors and on ways to counteract the whereas the latter is de-ned as

etacogniti!e in 0haldieh 2))) and relates to the learning %utting thesel!es into

situations where their language can be fostered and %rooted such as a social setting.

;owe!er strategies alone are not enough to a(e a learner error free and attention

ust be %aid to de!elo%ing the %ro-ciency in writing 80haldieh 2)))9 and the areas oflanguage su%%orting it so that the s(ills can substance to wor( with. Then results li(e

those seen in the %a%er by 0haldieh 2))) where writers that were ore %ro-cient were

those who used ore strategies 80haldieh 2)))9 can be seen ore widely. Therefore the

writer assues that ore s%ecialised writing classes 8il!a 139 which consider

de!elo%ental and interlingual issues should be used as o%%osed to generic writing

classes used ore generally in +ahrain and es%ecially in the institute for the students in

this %a%er. These should be able to hel% the learners by sca@olding the ty%e of writing

they are e,%ected to %roduce 8"yles 2))29 and %ro!ide eleents of linguistics nors

which ight di@er to those found in Arabic.


42/54

The ain ethod of writing used by all the teachers was a %rocess a%%roach with soe

of the teachers allowing %re writing grou% wor( to continue into the writing stage. Gne

teacher described how she allowed students to write an entire essay in grou%s with each

student being assigned one %aragra%h to scul%t and de!elo%. he claied that this

allowed ore focus on the %rogression of ideas organisation of the %aragra%h and

allowed the to focus on the !ocabulary they wanted to use for the s%eci-c section of

the essay. Another teacher e,%lained how she also used a s%ecial techni?ue forcoherence of essays and ga!e an e,a%le of cutting u% an article into a %u>>le and

allowing the studentsC tie to sol!e it. The -nal idea suggested was to ha!e students

learn error sybols which teacher use and to learn how to re!ise their writing once they

see the.

oe of the strategies entioned by the teachers in the seistructured inter!iew are

co%liented by suggestions and research -ndings elsewhere li(e for e,a%le those

regarding writing ore. oe linguists ha!e suggested that ore writing e?uates to a

higher le!el of %ro-ciency 8Lee 2))59 and one can certainly assue that the o%%osite

would result in %oor co%ositions fro students due to the lac( of %ractice. can also

read aloud their wor( each tie 8*a>i & Ahad 2)129and notice that they need to %utin brea(s i.e. %unctuation otherwise they %hysically run out of breath and this should

hel% the learners to iagine the reader ta(ing in the sentence. A further area of

i%ro!eent should be seen in s%elling due to the re%licating words ulti%le ties in the

writing and this will hel% to ignite the students own eorisation s(ills which the writer

feels are ?uite uni?ue to Arabic s%ea(ers due to a culture of Nuran eorisation. uch a

%ractice is also entioned in *a>i & Ahad 2)12 as %art of their suggestions for

i%ro!ing the writing of Arabic s%ea(ers co%osing in English. ;owe!er not e!eryone

agrees that %ractice a(es %erfect es%ecially when it coes to ore writing %ractice

and des%ite a hy%othesis that suggested i%ro!eents should occur the results

regarding free writing in Lee 2))5 showed little e@ect on %ro-ciency le!els. The writerta(es the stance that writing %ractice does hel% to de!elo%ed the s(ills students need for

co%osing co%etently.

tudents %racticing writing is not bene-cial alone without soe for of feedbac( and it

ay be necessary for the to recei!e soe ty%e of negati!e feedbac( to encourage and

%roote i%ro!eents in their wor( 8"yles 2))29. In the %a%er by "yles in 2))2 it is

suggested that teachers should loo( at a writing %rocess odel de!elo%ed by


43/54

%re!ent an o!erwheling aount of teacher led correction being gi!en to the students

8"yles 2))29 8*a>i & Ahad 2)129. I%ro!eents using a siilar techni?ue of %eer

correction showed %ositi!e results in the study by 'heng and te@ensen 1=. +y

learning fro their own ista(es and other students who are %rone to the sae ty%es of

de!elo%ental and transfer factors the students are li(ely to becoe better as the self

regulation i%ro!es detailed focus of the di@erent as%ects of writing 8Abiara 2))39

8Alsaadani 2)1)9. "oreo!er reading ore is has generally recei!ed good %ress withregards to i%ro!ing writing 8Lee 2))59 and this is a o%inion e,%ressed by 0rashen

13 in Lee 2))5 so the writer feels this %articular strategy should be e%loyed with the

students of this study.

Another area which would ha!e a %ositi!e e@ect on the students in this %a%er is the

de!elo%ent of le,ical :uency. uch a strategy if used by the teacher will allow the

students to de!elo% their %assi!e (nowledge of !ocabulary and discourse structures into

acti!e and usable entities 8Delderen et al. 2)119. uch an a%%roaches relies on the

assu%tion that better writer %ossess a richer and ore co%le, le,ical (nowledge

8Delderen et al. 2)119 but at the sae tie this (nowledge is usable in writing.

"oreo!er its (nowledge ust be ?uic( and easy for the writer to access so it ust ha!ebeen %rocedurised by training and re%etition. It was hy%othesised in the study by

Delderen et al. 2)11 that such a strategy would reduce the need for re%etition as the

writers would ha!e ore :uent le,is within their (nowledge but he was unable to -nd

o!erall te,t ?uality di@erentiation between those who had e,tra training and those who

did not. ;owe!er the writer feels that this strategy could be used in con4unction with

others laid out here to de!elo% the wea(ness seen in the %a%erCs sub4ects.

To co%lient the wor( on le,ical :uency the students should also wor( to de!elo% their

etadiscourse use as there is soe e!idence to suggest that by doing so the students

can i%ro!e their o!erall writing. In a s%ecial research %ro4ect on such strategies it was

seen that ore etadiscourse usage resulted in higher grades 8'heng & te@ensen

1=9. These less salient features of writing li(e coentary and attitude ar(ers hel%

to build a connection between the reader and the writer. This strategy would be able to

address certain features relating to discourse which ha!e been stated in the literacy

re!iew to lac( ?uality in ArabsC co%ositions. 'heng & te@ensen 1= state that a

ethod to de!elo% this s(ill is to ha!e students read 4ournal articles about etadiscourse

and then to re:ect and write res%onses to the. uch a strategy could be a%%lied to all of

the coon ty%e of errors %resented here and %ro!iding the students ha!e ade?uate

reading s(ills they could re:ect in the sae way.

Although the theory of transfer which has been acce%ted as a in:uential factor in theerrors %roduced by the students here has any unfa!ourable as%ects teachers should

be encouraged to a(e best use of its %otential facilitating as%ects. This can be done by

e,%loiting siilarities between languages to %roote %ositi!e transfer 8Tho%sonHanos

& Thoas$uiJ 1#39 80elleran 159 li(e that which was naturally seen in the

studentsC use of the s%eci-c article des%ite fre?uently oitting the generic article in the

Page43


44/54

data results of this %a%er. uch a strategy would wor( best with s%eci-c article usage in

English and with %re-,es and suB,es used with English words. +oth of these linguistic

features share siilarities with Arabic and should be bene-cial (nowledge for the

students.

Page44


45/54

Conclusion

The errors %roduced by the students in this %a%er were of a nature to suggest that

transfer was an i%ortant factor in their %roduction. There were signs of de!elo%ental

errors e,isting in the data set but these :uctuated in a di@erent %attern to those which

are deeed the result of interlingual transfer. Gf all the errors loo(ed at articles

%re%ositions and s%elling were the ost %robleatic. /nfortunately for the sub4ects of

this study these are also areas which are li(ely to be diBcult through the learning

%rocess due to their di@erence to the syste used in Arabic. The writer concludes that

the only way to co%e with these is for both the teacher and student to address the and

a(e use of a cobination of strategies as outlined in this %a%er. The writer feels that

strategy use ust be gi!en e?ual bearing in a course for the sub4ects in this study and

that language %ro-ciency ust ha!e e?ual standing.


46/54

:ibliogra(hyAbiara *. 2))3. An analysis of errors in Arabic speakers' English writing, +eirutS s.n.

Abushihab I. ElGari A. ;. & Tobat ". 2)11. An Analysis of 6ritten Draatical

Errors of Arab Learners of English as a aytoonah /ni!ersity of

Fordan. European Journal of Social Sciences, 2)89 %%. 53552.

Ahed A. ;. 2)1). tudentsC Hrobles with 'ohesion and 'oherence in E(i1Dw/T;?5G)HgXTi4ea>;sLY5N0#b"A,u0eygOc'6D=+igig


47/54

Ellis $. 1. -he study of second language ac/uisition+ G,fordS G,ford /ni!ersity Hress.

Delderen A. !. Gostda $. & chooten E. !. 2)11. oes


48/54

A!ailable atS htt%sSdocs.google.co!iewerVaQ!&?QcacheSFX3

1>IcAsFSciteseer,.ist.%su.edu!iewdocdownload3 ". F. 2)12. 0ey Issues in


49/54

Tahaineh Y. . 2)1). Arab E)L $ni6ersity Students' Errors in the $se of #repositions,

AanS Hrincess Alia /ni!ersity 'ollegeAl+al?aK A%%lied /ni!ersity.

Tho%sonHanos 0. & Thoas$uiJ ". 1#3. The Least You hould 0now about ArabicS

I%lications for the EL 6riting Instructor. -ES"L 1uarterly, 1789 %%. =)=23.

Page4$


50/54

A((endi/

irst set o# data #ro) )id(oint

isticory

Q 1#5

Q 73

=)

15

333

ty%e

Q 3

Q #

r Q 151

rder Q 13

21

-c*uber oferrors ois add isfor isorder

12 12 ) ) )

11 1) 1 ) )

G = ) = ) )

a = 2 1 )" = ) ) = )

D # ) ) # )

G 3 15 ) 2 )

r >ero 1 ) 1 ) )

OA = ) 1 5 )

12 7 5 ) )

t 3= 2 1) 2 )

2 2 ) ) )

3 = ) )

onoun 17 = 11 ) )13 ) ) ) 13

ng 7 ) ) 7 )

35 ) ) ) )

) ) ) )

sentence 2 ) ) ) )

Page5%


51/54

ati!e = ) ) ) )

7 ) ) 7 )

Q 311 #5 3 127 13

-econd set o# data #ro) the e/it e/a)

Linguistic category*uber oferrors

s& Q 127

or%h Q 5)

lex = 3#

dis Q 12

227

Error ty%e*uber oferrors

add Q 31

ois Q 5)

isfor Q

isorder Q 13

%eci-c

nuber of

errors ois add

isfor

isord

erarticle generic 22 1# 3 1 )

article s%eci-c 1) 7 3 ) )article s%eci-c for>ero = 1 5 ) )

co%ula 7 3 ) )

gr rule after odal 1 ) ) 1 )

gr rule ing 3 ) ) 3 )

gr rule other 2= 2 2) )

gr rule %assi!e 1 ) ) 1 )gr rule sub !erb

agree # ) ) ) )%re% 11 7 ) )

%unct = 2 ) )

%unct and 7 7 ) ) )

%unct ca% 5 1 ) )

$' %ronoun ) ) )

Page51


52/54

wo 12 ) ) ) 12

s% 5) ) ) 5) )

ww 23 ) ) ) 1

ww %re% 13 ) ) ) )

long sentence = ) ) ) )

re%etati!e ) ) ) )

start sentence withbecause 2 ) ) 2 )

Total Q 227 5) 33 7# 13

E/a)(le data sheet

s& ois AD are (ind ofs& ois AD as actor

s& ois AD ha!e nuber

s& ois AD in bad way

s& ois AD in liited ti

s& ois AD is interesting

s& ois AD It also old one

s& ois AD it is undeniab

s& ois AD 4ust bene-cia

s& ois AD the o%%ortu

Error Analysis of Bahrani Students

Documents

Transcript of Error Analysis of Bahrani Students