Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 33 no. 3 (2025)

An Error Analysis on the Syntactic Deviations of Grade 11 Students

Ernie Joy Pacomios

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Effective communication requires a strong command of syntax. However, many Senior High School students struggle with applying syntactic conventions in their writing which leads to frequent errors. This study aimed to analyze and categorize syntactic deviations in Grade 11 students' essays. Using a sample of 75 participants, essays were collected and analyzed based on Dulay et al.’s (1982) Surface Strategy Taxonomy, which classifies errors into omission, addition, misordering, and misformation. Results showed that students committed all five types of syntactic deviations, with omission being the most frequent. Findings suggest that students struggle with writing due to limited awareness of syntactic rules and conventions. The study recommends targeted syntax instruction and intervention programs to improve students' writing skills.



References:

  1. Abdelmohsen, M. M. (2022). Arab EFL learners’ writing errors: A contrastive error analysis study. British Journal of English Language  Linguistics, 10(4), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.37745/bjel.2013/vol10n4117
  2. Al-Badawi, K. (2013). An analysis of phonetic, morphological and syntactic errors in English: A case study of Saudi BA students at  King Khalid University. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 536-538. https://doi.org/10.7763/ijssh.2012.v2.165
  3. Benzigar, M., & Vinothini, M. (2021). Syntactic deviations in Tamil speaking students’ ESL writings: a study in error analysis. Journal  of Xi'an University of Architecture & Technology, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.37896/JXAT2.1/30300
  4. Chomsky, N. (1969). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press. 
  5. Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford University Press, USA. 
  6. Department of Education. (2011). Guidelines on the every child a reader program. Department of Education, Republic of the  Philippines. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/DO-No.-70-s.-2011-new.pdf
  7. Department of Education. (2016). K to 12 curriculum guide: English (Grade 1 to Grade 10). Department of Education, Republic of the  Philippines. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/English-CG.pdf
  8. Frazer, T. C., Fromkin, V., & Rodman, R. (1984). An introduction to language. Language, 60(2), 448. https://doi.org/10.2307/413657
  9. Gamilo, D., & Aggaba, R. (2019). Composition writing skills of senior high school students. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences, 8(7), 19-36.  https://www.indianjournals.com/ijor.aspx?target=ijor:ijarmss&volume=8&issue=7&article=004
  10. Gayo, H., & Widodo, P. (2018). An analysis of morphological and syntactical errors on the English writing of junior high school  Indonesian students. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 17(4), 58-70.  https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.17.4.4
  11. Hafiz, M. (2018). Analysis of syntactic deviations in English writing. Journal of Education and Practice, 113-120.  https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234641526.pdf
  12. James, C. (2013). Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis. Routledge.
  13. Reid, J. M. (1993). Teaching ESL writing. Prentice Hall. 
  14. Rieckmann, M. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. UNESCO Publishing. 
  15. Roxas, M. J. (2020). Exploring senior high school students’ academic writing difficulties: Towards an academic writing model. International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 2(1), 10-19. https://doi.org/10.54476/iimrj376
  16. Sultan, S. (2015). Syntactic deviations in Pakistani undergraduate students' written English. Journal of Education and Social Sciences,  3(2), 245-259. https://tehqeeqat.org/downloadpdf/2410
  17. Talosa, A., & Maguddayao, R. (2018). Evaluation of second language learners’ syntactic errors in ESL writing. TESOL Quarterly, 13.  https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1244109
  18. Tati, J. S., Gedion, A., & Yong, H. (2017). Cross-linguistic influence in Malaysian esl learners writing: A case study. PEOPLE:  International Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), 509-518. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2015.s21.509518
  19. Turkish speaking first year and third year ELT students’ syntactic deviations in their argumentative essays. (2010).  https://www.proquest.com/openview/42a77e60822285b7299468f0209b7b8c/1.pdf?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=2026366&diss=y
  20. UNICEF & SEAMEO. (2020). SEA-PLM 2019 main regional report children’s learning in 6 southeast Asian countries.  https://www.seaplm.org/PUBLICATIONS/regional%20results/SEA-PLM%202019%20Main%20Regional%20Report.pdf
  21. Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J., Van Dijk, J. A., & De Haan, J. (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A  systematic literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 577-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.010

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic