DEIKTIS: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, Vol. 2, No.

2, 2022

Copyright © the author(s)

An Error Analysis on the Use of Simple Past Tense

Abdullah Syukur1
Ardhy Supraba2

Cokroaminoto Palopo University, Indonesia

[email protected]

Abstract
The objectives of this study are (1) to identify and classify the errors of the second
semester students of Informatic Study Program Cokroaminoto Palopo University in using
simple past tense, (2) to describe the frequency occurrence of the errors. The instrument
used was a test on English simple past tense. The population of the study was the second
semester students of Informatic Study Program Cokroaminoto Palopo University. The
sample consisted of 50 students. Students errors identified in this study were categories
into three types, namely, errors of omission, errors of addition and errors of
misformation. The result of the analysis shows that there were in all, 1234 errors among
50 students. The types of errors among the students in constructing and using English
simple past tense consisted of 68 (5%) errors of omission, 95 (8%) errors of addition
and 1071 (87%) errors of misformation. From the highest to the lowest, the errors were:
misformation, addition, and omission. The result of further analysis shows that the
students seemingly have problems in each category omission, addition and
misformation. The average number of errors made of all the students was 46%. From the
percentage, it can be concluded that the students’ mastery in using English simple past
tense was poor. It is hoped that the finding of the present study will be useful for the
teaching of English, especially the teaching of English simple past tense.
Key words: An error analysis, simple past tense

Introduction
English as an international language has an important role to develop science and
technologies many countries in the world use English as a medium of communication
among people in different countries, and also of writing many kinds of books in which
those are spread in different countries. For many years, English has been the most
important foreign language in Indonesia. The learners must be able to master the four
skills, they are: listening, speaking, reading, and writing, also English components such
as: grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, etc. Among the four skills, writing is the most
difficult one because it requires demonstrating the control of a number of variables
simultaneously; they are control of content, format, sentence structure, vocabulary,
punctuation spelling, etc. Alam (2016) points out, “It has been argued that learning to
write fluently and expressively is the most difficult of the macro skills for all language
users regardless of whether the language in question is first, second, or foreign
language.” The writing skills are complex and sometimes difficult to teach, requiring
mastery not only of grammatical and rhetorical devices but also of conceptual and
judgment elements. It means that ability to write needs a special skill and process in
organizing language material by using learners’ own words and ideas and to be a good
composition.
The learners often make mistakes and even errors in learning English, especially
when they try to arrange sentences or use tenses in their writing. As a result, they will
write sentences ungrammatically. Actually, ungrammatical sentences have great

https://dmi-journals.org/deiktis/index 83
Vol. 2, No. 2, 2022
ISSN 2807-7504

influence when the learners are writing sentences. That can be influenced by the first
language which is different from the second language in written form.
It can be seen that errors in learning a second language are caused by the
interference of the learners’ mother tongue. In other words, errors made by the learners
sometimes are caused by use of the first language. Making Errors is a natural and
unavoidable part of the process of learning English. Many kinds of errors arise when the
learners write because they do not master the English structure well. Also, errors are the
inability of the students in using rules of the components and elements of the second
language. So almost all learners must make errors when they are learning English
because it is difficult to separate error in the process of learning English.
Students’ errors are very useful ways of showing what they have and have not
learnt. Errors are important to study in order to understand the process of learning. A
study of learners’ errors describes what problems the learners are having now and help
the teacher plan remedial work. In addition, the teacher should not see negatively as a
sign of failure but see them positively as an indication of what the teacher or lecturer
still needs to teach. So, if the teacher or lecturer tries to prevent students; errors, he/she
never finds out what they do not know.
To categorize error into classification based on the types or the sources of errors is
not easy work. Many times error cannot be traced back into one source. Moreover, the
boundaries between different sources of error many sometimes be unclear that the
arbitrary classification decision unavoidable. According to the process editing written by
Sue Loarch (1984: 181) the writer concludes that there are two categories of errors,
global and local errors. Global errors are those which affect the over all sentence
organization significantly, while local errors are those affect single element (constituent)
in a sentences.
Amin (2017) made a classification of errors in comparative taxonomy based on
comparisons between the structure of L2 errors and certain other types of constructions
there comparisons result in four types of errors; developmental, inter-lingual,
ambiguous and other errors. Furthermore, based on surface strategy taxonomy, Amin
(2017) give emphasis on the ways surface structure is altered. Learners may omit
necessary items or add unnecessary ones, they may misfire item or miss order them.
Thus, the errors may be in the form of omission, addition, miss formation, and miss
ordering errors types.
Omission errors are characterized by the absence of an item that must appear in a
well-formed utterance. Although any morpheme or word in a sentence is a potential
candidate for omission, some types of morpheme are omitted than others. Additional
errors are the opposite of omission. They are characterized by the presence of an item,
which must not appear in a well-formed utterance. Additional errors include double
marking, regularization and simple addition that is an addition that is not double
marking or regularization. Misformation errors are characterized by the use of the
wrong from of morpheme or structure, while in omission errors the items is not
supplied at all, in miss-formation errors the learners. Supplies something although it is
in correct. Misordering errors are characterized by the incorrect placement of a
morpheme or group morphemes in a utterance.
The error classification is intended as an aid to present data rather than to create a
basic for extensive speculating concerning the source of errors. To make a good
composition, the students must be able to master and apply the structure correctly,
especially about tense used. In this case, the tense used is simple past tense. If they
cannot do that, of course, errors will arise. Automatically their writing will cause

84
 DEIKTIS: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra
ISSN 2807-7504

misunderstanding for the readers, because the readers cannot receive the massage or
expression of their idea well. Most of the students still find problems in using it, because
of their limited mastery, especially the differences between regular and irregular verb.
Therefore the writer wants to analyze the errors made by the students and tries to give
solutions to overcome their problems. The research question in this research was what
errors are made by the second semester students of Informatic Study Program
Cokroaminoto Palopo University in using simple past tense?

Method
The use of method in a research is very necessary, because it will be able to help a
researcher get data easily. This research used survey method. It is used to describe
phenomena of a case by taking its data that will be analyzed and generalized to the
population of the research through Descriptive to qualitative samples.
The case that was surveyed in this research was about phenomena of English
simple past tense errors committed by the second semester students of Informatic Study
Program Cokroaminoto Palopo University. The subject of the research was 50 students,
they were 25 from class 2B and 25 students were from class 2G.
Instrument used to get data in this research was in the form of topics list used in
the writing composition. The researcher used the form of topics list as instrument for
asking the students to produce their language in the form of written language through
writing composition spontaneously in the class.
The technique used to collect data in this research was by giving a test of writing
composition to the students. The purpose of giving the test was to ask the students to
produce her/his language through writing an English composition spontaneously. It
means that it does not give the opportunity to the students to look up his/her note. The
result of the students’ work was needed to analyze their language, which has many kinds
of errors. So in this case test did not measure the students’ ability in the writing skill, but
it analyzed the student’s errors in producing their language in the written form in the
aspect of English simple past tense.
According to the Carden’s Model (1987:173) the first step in process if analysis is
the identification of errors. After identifying the errors the total number of errors, made
by the learners was counted, and the value each errors was 1 (one). After the
identification of the errors, the researcher formed a reconstruction of the correction of
the sentences in the target language, or on the other word, the researcher compared the
original sentences and finally describe the differences.

Results
1. Errors of Omission
They are indicated by the absence of one or more items that must appear in a well-
formed sentence. From the data analysis, errors of omission, which could be identified in
these studies, are:
a. Omission of “not” in negative simple past tense.
b. Omission of the simple past tense, and
c. Blanks or unanswered items.
1) Omission of “not” (n’t) in negative simple past tense
Such errors, in this study were found when the students did not understand the
form of the statement whether it was negative or positive, which would determine the
form of the simple past tense needed. Most of the time the students were probably still

85
Vol. 2, No. 2, 2022
ISSN 2807-7504

confused or lack of attention with the form or the statement, which were asked for
confirmation, so they answered with the wrong form of simple past tense.
The examples found in students answer sheets:
1. He did help his father in the yard.
2. She did studied English and Indonesia.
3. He did cleaned the house yesterday.
4. Tuti did washed her shirts last week.
5. Ali did carried the radio to his brother’s house.
The underline simple past tense, which errors in the answer sheets are wrong as
they do not correspond to the right answer/simple past tense needed for statements
given. “not” as an indication of negative forms, is left out in these sentences.
Reconstruction of the sentences”
1. He did not help his father in the yard.
2. He did not help his father in the yard.
3. He did not clean the house yesterday.
4. Tuti did not wash her shirts last week.
5. Ali did not carry the radio to his brother’s house.

2) Omission of “Ed” of Simple Past Tense

The omission of “ed” of the simple past tense, is indicated by the sentence of
predicated in the simple past tense. The examples are:
i. She want to see her brother there.
ii. Ana carry the basket for her mother.
iii. On Monday I wash my shirts.
iv. On Friday I study match and history.
v. Yesterday I clean the house.
Those simple past tenses shown above are considered wrong because the predicate
of the simple past tense (Predicate on type II) are left out:
Reconstruction of the sentences:
1. She wanted to see her brother there
2. Ana carried the basket for her mother
3. On Monday I washed my shirts
4. On Friday I studied math and history
5. Yesterday I cleaned the house

Blanks or unanswered items

Besides the two kinds of omission described above, at the time, it was found that
there were many items left unanswered. In the students answer sheets, they were seen
as blank answer for related number of items.

2. Errors of Addition
The second type of errors in this study is errors of addition. As it has been
mentioned in advance, errors of addition are characterized by the presence of one or
more items that must appear in well-formed sentences. Identified in this study include:
1) Addition of “was/were” on nominal sentences
Errors in the form of addition of “was/were’ to simple past tense on nominal
sentence is characterized by the appearance of ‘was/were’ to simple past tense.
The examples are:

86
 DEIKTIS: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra
ISSN 2807-7504

1. Tari did in the living room

2. They are in the classroom
3. She did reading a newspaper
4. Mr. Smith did a teacher in SMP
5. She does very happy with the apples, the oranges and the flowers
Reconstruction of the sentences:
1. Tari was in the living room.
2. They were in the classroom
3. she was reading a news paper
4. Mr. Smith was a teacher in SMP
5. She was very happy with the apples, the oranges and the flower.

3. Errors of Misformation
These kinds of Errors are characterized by the use of incorrect form morpheme or
structure. While in errors of omission, the items is not supplied of all, in errors of
misformation the learners supply something although it is in an incorrect form. The
errors of miss formation identified in this study are:
a. Misformation of “V1 to be VII”.
b. Misformation of auxiliaries “did, was, were.
c. Misformation of “to be “(was/were)
d. Misformation of change to negative (-) and interrogative, (?) sentence.
e. Misformation of “did” and “was/were” in the interrogative (?)

1) Misformation of “V1 to become VII”

Usually, the errors occurred since the students still don’t understand with the rule
or the usage of pattern.
The examples are:
1. Yeni go to the market yesterday.
2. Mary help the teacher to clean the blackboard.
3. They play football in the yard.
4. He study English in his school.
5. His father works in the post office.

Reconstruction of the sentences:

1. Yeni went to the market yesterday.
2. Mary helped the teacher to clean the blackboard.
3. They played football in the yard.
4. He studied English in his school.
5. His father worked in the post office.
2) Misformation of auxiliaries “did, was, were”.
The errors occurred as the students at that find still did not understand yet or they
were likely confused with the use of auxiliaries (did, was, were).
The examples are:
1. He does play football last Sunday.
2. Rini were in living room.
3. They was reading a newspaper.
4. Jony does not writing A letter yesterday.
5. Father were talking with mother.

87
Vol. 2, No. 2, 2022
ISSN 2807-7504

Reconstruction of the sentences:

1. He did not play football last Sunday.
2. Rini was in living room.
3. They were reading a newspaper.
4. Jony did not write a letter yesterday.
5. Father was talking with mother.

3) Misformation of “to be “(was/were)

These errors appeared When the students used incorrect forms or to be which are
not in agreement with the subject of the simple past tense
The example is:
- They was in the garden looking for flowers.

Reconstruction of the sentence

- They were in the garden looking for flowers.

4) Misformation of “change to negative (-) and interrogative (?).”

The errors are characterized by the use of incorrect simple past tense as the
influence of change to negative and interrogative.
The examples are:
1. We did not washed the desk (-)
2. Listened Tono to the song (?)
3. Maria carried not her bag (-)
4. Do they talked to Mr. Brown (?)
5. Ani did not written a letter (-)

Reconstruction of the sentences:

1. We did not wash the desk (-)
2. Did Tono listen to the song (?)
3. Maria did not carry her bag (-)
4. Did they talk to Mr. Brown (?)
5. Ani did not write a letter (-)

5) Misformation of “did” and “was/were” in the interrogative (?)

The errors are characterized by the use of incorrect simple past tense for the
statements beginning with “did” and “was/were”. These errors are characterized by the
incorrect use of both the auxiliaries in the simple past tense.
The examples are:
1. Does Tini cooking when her mother come?
2. Does Mr. Brown a teacher?
3. Do Lestari went to school yesterday?
4. Does Mary left the house at eight?
5. Do they answered the question?
Reconstruction of the sentences:
1. Was Tini cooking when her mother com?
2. Was Brown a teacher?
3. Did Lestari went to school yesterday?
4. Did Mary leave the house at eight?
5. Did they answer the question?

88
 DEIKTIS: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra
ISSN 2807-7504

Quantitative analysis was done as the coming process of identifying and

classifying the errors, in the attempt to answer research question, especially concerning
with the students errors and problems in using English simple past tense. Students on
the test did this analysis on the basic of competition on the percentage of errors mode.
Then, from the errors percentage, it can also be inferred which aspects/items of English
simple past tense. Therefore, in this study a certain item is identified as a difficult item is
45 % or more if the students make errors.

Table 1: Students Mastery Level in Terms of Errors

Errors Level of Mastery
8 % - 15 % Very Good
16 % - 30 % Good
31 % - 45 % Fair
46 % - 50 % Poor
51 % - 100 % Very Poor
It is found that in this study the students had difficulty in using English simple
past tense since they still made many errors.
There are 23 items out of 50 items having error percentage 45%.It means that
the students’ level of mastery is still poor since they still faced difficulties in certain
items of simple past tense. It terms of errors types, the frequency occurrence of each
error type is provided in table 4.2.

Table 2: Frequency of Occurrence of Each Error Type

Type of Errors Number of Errors Percentage of errors
Omission 68 5%
Addition 95 8%
Misformation 1071 87 %
Misordering - -
TOTAL 1234 100 %

The percentage of each type or errors above was calculated by using the formula:
Number of errors types
Terms of each error types
X 100 %
Total number of errors
Table 2 shows that out of 1234 errors, there are 68 (5%) errors omission, 95
(8%) errors of addition, and 1071 (87%) errors miss formation, there is no error of
missordering.

Discussion
The second semester students of Informatic Study Program Cokroaminoto
Palopo University in using English simple past tense was analyzed as an attempting to
find out the errors mode. It is included identifying the errors and classifying the errors.
Identifying the Errors was done identifying and counting the numbers of errors which
appeared in the students answer sheets. As in had done, the test in English simple past
tense, which consists of 50 items, was conducted to 54 subjects. Most of the items in the
test were answered (which were included in the errors of omission). Besides, the
researcher also described the number of errors (wrong answer) for each sentence on

89
Vol. 2, No. 2, 2022
ISSN 2807-7504

the test as an integrated part of the description of the frequency of occurrence of the
errors.
Then, the classification the error into error type was done based on the surface
strategy taxonomy. In which errors can be described into four types, they are:
1. Errors of omission: the absence of an item test must appear in a well-farmed
utterance.
2. Errors of addition: the presence of an item, which must not appear in a well-
farmed utterance.
3. Errors of miss formation: the use of the wrong form of the morpheme or
structure.
4. Errors of misordering the incorrect placement of a morpheme or a group of
morpheme in an utterance.
However, it was found from the data. There was no error of miss ordering. So that
in the analysis errors only consisted of errors of omission, addition, and misformation.
This was done to compare the right sentences with the students’ wrong sentences and
also to indicate to which types the errors belong.
The data analysis of the test on simple past tense shows that errors of
misformation reached the highest frequency, followed by errors of addition, and errors
or omission. It is found that there is no error of misordering in this study. Further
analysis concerning the use of simple past tense in terms of each always of the items
shows that misformation errors were always of the highest frequency. The researcher
concludes that it happened because most of the students still have problems especially
with the use of tense, auxiliaries, and special patterns on the simple past tense.

Conclusion
The result of the analysis shows that there were 1234 errors among 50 students.
The types of errors among the students in constructing and using English simple past
tense consisted of 68 (5%) errors of omission, 95 (8%) errors of addition and 1071
(87%) errors of misformation. From the highest to the lowest, the errors were:
misformation, addition, and omission. The result of further analysis shows that the
students seemingly have problems in each category omission, addition and
misformation. The average number of errors made of all the students was 46%. From
the percentage, it can be concluded that the students’ mastery in using English simple
past tense was poor.

90
 DEIKTIS: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra
ISSN 2807-7504

References

Alam. 2016. Developing the Writing Ability of the Second Year Students of MAN Model
Makassar through Community Language Learning (CLL) Method. Thesis S1, UIN
Alauddin Makassar.
Amin, Syarif. 2017. Using the Students’ Error for Teaching in Improving the Writing Abilty
of the Fourth Semester Students of English Deparment of UIN. Thesis S1, UIN
Alauddin Makassar.
Bambang, Sugeng and Nazr, Sainah. 2004. Functional English for Senior High School. Solo:
PT Tiga Serangkai Mandiri.
Bram, Bark. 1995. Write Skill, Improving Writing Skills. Yogyakarta: Kamision Publisher.
Gay, L.R. 2006. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis & Applications (Eigth
Edition). Columbus, Ohio: Pearson Merril Prentice Hall.
Heaton, J.B. 1984. Writing English Language Test. Singapore: Banwash Press Ptc., Ltd.
Join, M.P. 1992. Error Analysis, Source, Cause and Significance. In Richards, J.C. (ED). Error
Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition. London: Longman Group
Limited.
Harmer, Jeremy. 1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York.
Irwans. 2016. The Ability at the Students to Use Conjunction in Paragraph Writing.
Unpublished Thesis FBS UNM.
Kotta, Marwah. 2019. The Effect of Indirect Teacher Feedback in the Composition
Revision of the Second Year Students of SMA Negeri 2 Makassar.
Thesis.Unpublished. Makassar. State University of Makassar.
Longman. Hasanah, 2009. The Effectiveness of Autonomous Learning in Improving
Reading Comprehension. Unpublished Thesis. Makassar. UNM.
Ricards, Rodgers. 1986. Approach and Methods in language Teaching. Melbourne:
Cambridge University Press.
Shao-yue, Wu. 2019. A Study of Network-Based Multimedia College English Autonomous
Teaching and Learning Model. A Journal US – China Foreign Language.
Sugiyono. 2014. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan: Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan
R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta
Supriandi. 2018. Developing Students Writing Ability through Topic of Interest. Thesis
FBS. UNM.
Wierma, W. 2006. Research Methods in Education on Introduction. University of Tolado:
FE. Peacock Publisher, Inc.

91