Interlanguage in Teaching Indonesian to Bilingual Schools in Bali
on
e-Journal of Linguistics
Available online at https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol/index
Vol. 18, No. 1, January 2023, pages: 118--126
Print ISSN: 2541-5514 Online ISSN: 2442-7586
https://doi.org/10.24843/e-jl.2024.v18.i01.p11
Interlanguage in Teaching Indonesian to Bilingual Schools in Bali
Eka Dwi Putra
Udayana University, Denpasar, Indonesia. Email: depe0254@gmail.com
Article info
Received Date:22 Juni 2023
Accepted Date: 28 July 2023
Published Date:31 January 2024
Keywords: Interlanguage, Teaching, Bilingual School
Abstract
The process of learning a foreign language as a second language, all learners will face the process of creating an interlanguage. Selinker's hypothesis (1972) says that interlanguage is different from the mother tongue and from the target language (which is being learned). If the pragmatic study is connected with the interlanguage system, it will later become a study of how speakers and non-native speakers acquire, understand, and use linguistic patterns or speech acts in a second language. Selinker (1972) classifies problems in interlanguage, one of which is a methodological problem in which one type of empirical research suggests error analysis. Error analysis or abbreviated children is a limited instrument in the investigation of second language acquisition (PB2). Burt, Dulay, or Krashen (1982) differentiate areas (taxonomies) for language errors. The first is a taxonomy of linguistic categories which classifies errors based on the components of language, namely phonology (speech), syntax and morphology (grammar; grammar), semantics and lexicon of meaning, and discourse (style). This study describes the interlanguage problem which is included in the "taxonomy of linguistic categories" that occurs in the speech process of teaching Indonesian at bilingual schools, namely Canggu Community School and Green School Bali.
Advances in science and technology accompanied by the increasingly rapid currents of world globalization have had their own impact on the world of education. For example, in recent years, there have been many schools known as bilingual schools, which apply foreign languages such as English as a compulsory subject and are taught intensively in schools. In addition, an international standard school system has been implemented at several levels of education, both public and private. The teaching and learning process in bilingual schools must emphasize the development of creativity, innovation and experimentation for new ideas that have never existed. International standards demanded in bilingual schools are graduate competency standards, curriculum, teaching and learning processes, human resources, facilities, management, financing and international standard assessment. In a bilingual school the teaching and learning process is delivered in two languages, namely English and Indonesian. Bilingual schools in Bali are expected to help students build their minds and achieve high learning standards. When it comes to educational places of the highest quality, bilingual schools are one of them. With a bilingual
school, they will be able to adapt and engage with diversity, learn a foreign language and mother tongue at the same time, and have better career opportunities. Bali has many international standard bilingual schools because Bali is not only a world tourist destination but also a place where expatriates and their families live. Some examples of the best international bilingual schools in Bali are Green School Bali and Canggu Community School which will be the locations of this research.
In general, in the process of learning a foreign language as a second language, all learners will face the process of creating an interlanguage. Selinker's hypothesis (1972) says that interlanguage is different from the mother tongue and from the target language (which is being learned). The interlanguage system is a combination of the mother tongue system and the target language. Thus, interlanguage has its own language system which is different from both the mother tongue system and the target language and is considered as a natural language system. If the pragmatic study is connected with the interlanguage system, it will later become a study of how speakers and non-native speakers acquire, understand, and use linguistic patterns or speech acts in a second language. In line with the process of learning a second language, all learners will make mistakes when learning a foreign language (BA), "You can't learn without goofing". Generally, such mistakes are considered natural, unavoidable (Corder 1981: 65). Errors are bound to arise when learning anything that requires creativity, including learning a foreign language (BA). In Corder's concept, language errors are no longer considered mere deviations, but rather a source for learning the language system of foreign language learners. As Corder stated (1977: 167) that mistakes are "evidence about the nature of the process and of the rules used by the learner at a certain stage in the course". Therefore, to study interlanguage systems, we can explore them through language error analysis. Interlanguage problems and fossilized/persistent errors or "the persistence of plateaus of non-target like competence in the interlanguage" (Selinker 1988: 92) are foreign language acquisition phenomena that have attracted much attention from researchers in the field of second language acquisition. acquisitions). One of the problems that is often studied is whether the error is persistent or not. The emergence of interlanguage studies today is mostly associated with the phenomenon of fossilization of errors. The term fossilization refers to the condition of stagnant competence in foreign language learners, language errors remain attached to the learner's interlanguage system; its companion term is stabilization. The difference between the two terms is the permanent condition. Stable faults are temporary while fossilized faults are permanent or forever (Selinker and Lakshamanan 1992).
Han (2004: 4) also states that in the fossilization of errors there are two different perspectives. The first view says that interlanguage errors are irreversible; the interlanguage system is fossilized. The implication is that adult learners (having passed a critical period) are unlikely to achieve native competence. Han (2004) himself tends to support this paradigm. The second view says that interlanguage can be restored because it is not fossilized. The implication is that it is still possible for adult language learners (having passed a critical period) to achieve native speaker competence. With regard to speech acts in the process of learning a foreign language, Primantari and Wijana (2017), based on the results of their research on teaching Indonesian to Korean students, there are interlanguage constraints. The emergence of these obstacles can be seen in the appearance of asking utterances in Indonesian produced by BIPA students from Korea. These findings reveal that there are several factors that influence the emergence of obstacles in the speech. The main factor for the emergence of these speech differences is due to linguistic factors and non-linguistic factors. Linguistic factors include the influence of the intermediate language and the imperfect mastery of Indonesian grammar by BIPA learners from Korea. Meanwhile, non-linguistic factors are mainly caused by cultural
differences between Indonesians and Koreans, when they started learning Indonesian, and the habits of Koreans in using an informal variety of Indonesian.
The phenomenon of the emergence of bilingual schools in Indonesia, especially Bali as a world tourism destination, will create motivation to learn foreign languages. Most of these bilingual schools use a foreign language, namely English as the language of instruction. This study tries to analyze how utterances and obstacles in learning Indonesian are taught to foreign students. The linguistic phenomena that appear in this study are interesting to study, such as the emergence of obstacles in learning the rules of the foreign language itself. In addition, new language systems that are temporary or called interlanguage acquisition will also emerge. Later this speech act research will provide information about the causative factors that influence the process.
The research design used is qualitative research. Moleong (2000: 3) states, qualitative research is research that produces descriptive data in the form of written or spoken words consisting of observed behaviors. The type of research used is descriptive research. According to Nawawi (1994:73), descriptive research is a problem-solving procedure that is investigated by describing the current state of the research object based on the facts that appear as they are. The qualitative descriptive analysis strategy model in this study was applied to get an overview of linguistic aspects that experience interlanguage constraints in the Indonesian language learning process in bilingual schools.
The data in this study are in the form of spoken conversational discourse which is transcribed in the form of written data. Thus, recorded data in the learning process in the form of oral data is then transcribed into written data. These utterances are produced during dialogue, interaction, and communication which are obtained in the learning process in class. The source of the data in this research is the speech acts that are uttered and these utterances are obtained in the process of learning Indonesian in class. Data sources were determined using the results of observations and interviews with researchers in the learning process. There are two methods used in an effort to determine the rules in the data analysis stage in this study, namely: the equivalent method and the distribution method. There are two kinds of methods for presenting the results of data analysis, namely informal and formal (Sudaryanto, 1993: 144).
The following describes the interlanguage problem which is included in the "taxonomy of linguistic categories" that occurs in the speech process of teaching Indonesian at bilingual schools, namely Canggu Community School and Green School. To make it easier to analyze the data for each data based on the research location, each data of utterances between teacher and students was given its own code, namely CS for Canggu Community School teachers, and GS for Green School Bali. Each code is assigned a number according to the order in which the data is numbered, such as CS 1 which means the speech of Canggu Community School teachers and students with data sequence number 1. Several examples of elements of errors included in the linguistic category are presented as follows.
-
3.1 Phonological Error
Data GS (3-1)
Siswa :Saya ingin (ucapan: in-gin) belajar hukum dan menjadi pengacara (ucapan: pengacara) yang sangat baik.
(Student: I want to study law and become a good lawyer).
In the phonological error it is implied the cause of the language error. One of them is to put a pause when pronouncing a group of words or sentences. Pronunciation and writing do not always coincide in Indonesian. This is evident in the decapitation of words. In the data above, students speak in Indonesian, and there are errors in the words spoken, namely “ingin” and “pengacara”. The word “ingin to be cut off should be “i-ngin”. The word “pengacara” should be pronounced in accordance with the syllable, namely “pe-nga-ca-ra”. This happens because if in the middle of a word there is a consonant flanked by two vowels, the beheading is done before the consonant.
Data GS (3-2)
Siswa : Saya di kelas delapan (8) dan saya tiga belas (13) tahun (Ucapan: siga belas tahun).
(Student: I am in eighth grade and I am thirteenth years old)
One of the errors in Indonesian in the field of phonology that foreign students often make is the omission or addition of certain phonemes. In the following, some data on errors in learning Indonesian by foreign students can be analyzed. The data above shows that there is a process of changing the pronunciation of phonemes. In this case there is a process of changing the pronunciation of the phoneme /t/ to /s/. This process affects the intended meaning of the word.
Data GS (3-3)
Siswa : Bali adalah budaya yang unik (ucapan:yunik).
(Student: Bali has unique culture)
In the data above students pronounce unique words by adding the phoneme /y/ in front of them, so that the pronunciation of these words becomes unique. The addition of these phonemes can change the pronunciation of words to sound close to English pronunciation.
Data GS (3-4)
Siswa : Saya mau tanya (ucapan: tan-ya) tentang kondisi pariwisata Bali, bagaimana pendapat anda?
(Student: I want to ask about Bali tourism condition, what is your opinion?)
In the speech data the student also experienced syllable decapitation errors. The word “tanya” is pronounced “tan-ya” which should be in accordance with the standard Indonesian pronunciation rules. The beheading that corresponds to the correct syllable is “ta-nya”, because if in the middle of a word there is a consonant flanked by two vowels, the beheading is done before the consonant.
Data CS (3-1)
Siswa : Siapa Azwar?
(Student: Who is Azwar?)
One of the morphological errors is the use of affixation. An example of an affixation is a suffix or suffix. According to Putrayasa (2008) suffixes or suffixes are bound morphemes that are placed behind a basic form in forming words. The number of original suffixes in Indonesian, namely -an, -i, -kan, and -nya. Type suffix (-kah) is more often used in everyday speech. Words with a suffix (-kah) will change their meaning to become an affirmation in a question. The above statement should have a suffix (-kah) to make the question more effective, i.e. “Siapakah Azwar?”
Data GS (3-2)
Siswa : Saya umur empat belas (14).
(Student: I am fourteenth years old)
Prefixes are affixes that are attached in front of basic words (Chaer, 2008). The prefix ber- in Indonesian will remain in the form of if the prefix is directly related to a form or word that starts with a vowel, except for the vowel /a/ in the construction of the form /ajar/ and with a form that starts with a consonant /r/. The data above there is a process of speech errors produced by foreign students. The error is in the form of omission of affixes. The word “umur” in this utterance should have a prefix ber-. The prefix ber- has the meaning of declaring the amount. In the above expression the word “umur” should be added with the prefix ber- to be”berumur”. Thus, the meaning of the word becomes clear, namely explaining the number of ages of these students.
Siswa : Waktu Natal ada hadiah kado. Bintang di atas pohon. Percaya ada Santa Claus. Ada ornament mainan. Mainan dengan salju. Makan-makan besar.
(Student: In Christmas there is gift. Star on the tree. Believe in Santa Claus. There is toy. Play snow. Big meal)
The data above is composed of ambiguous sentences. Because the irregular arrangement makes the information difficult to understand (Keraf, 1980: 133), looking at the confusion in terms of form confusion, both sentence forms, word forms, or word order which are strung together or arranged in an overlapping manner or not, thus giving rise to sentences, incorrect or garbled word forms and word order. The utterance sentence above is composed of more than two clauses which causes its meaning to be ineffective. The phrase should be " Pada perayaan Natal terdapat hadiah, bintang di atas pohon, mainan, salju, dan makan besar".
Data GS (3-2)
Siswa : Neymar saya suka semua kapan saya jatuh bilang saya akting Neymar.
(Student: I like Neymar, when I fall my acting is said to be similar Neymar)
One of the factors causing errors in syntax is the use of sentences that are affected by the structure of a foreign language. Examples such as the existence of word order errors in a sentence are mostly caused by the influence of a foreign language, or are literal translations from foreign language forms. Even though the structure of the Indonesian language is different from the structure of foreign languages. The field of sentence structure concerns the order of words and phrases in relation to its laws. In Indonesian, the word order follows the rules “diterangkan-menerangkan (DM)”, whereas in foreign languages, for example, in English, the pattern of rules is “menerangkan-diterangkan (MD)”. In the data above, it can be seen that the word order pattern is ambiguous, causing the sentence to have an unclear meaning. The sentence should be " Saya suka Neymar, ketika terjatuh akting saya dibilang seperti Neymar ".
Siswa : “Selamat pagi warga Yogyakarta, perkenalkan nama saya Agus Wastanwangi, dan saya seorang aktivis lingkungan, dan saya bekerja untuk PSR Asosiasi. PSR adalah akronim untuk “Program Standing River”. Saya disini berbicara karena ada masalah sungai kita lagi sedang sekarat.
(Student: Good morning Yogyakarta residents, introduce my name is Agus Wastanwangi, and I am an environmental activist, and I work for the PSR Association. PSR is an acronym for “Standing River Program”. I am here to speak because there is a problem, namely our river is being polluted.”)
In the student speech data above, there is an inappropriate use of the lexicon. The choice of the word "sekarat" in the sentence makes the meaning of the utterance ambiguous. In addition, there is also redundancy (excess meaning), namely the word "lagi". The greeting should have been “Selamat pagi warga Yogyakarta, perkenalkan nama saya Agus Wastanwangi, dan saya seorang aktivis lingkungan, dan saya bekerja untuk PSR Asosiasi. PSR adalah akronim untuk “Program Standing River”. Saya di sini berbicara karena ada masalah, yaitu sungai kita sedang tercemar”
Data GS (3-2)
Siswa : Ya pantai cantik sekali.
(Student: Yes, the beach is very beautiful
The students' utterances in expressing something in the sentence use a lexicon that is not quite right. The adjective "cantik" in this sentence is more suitable to be used to describe certain characteristics of living things. While a more appropriate adjective is "cantik" which is commonly used for inanimate objects. Thus the effective utterance is " Ya pantai indah sekali "
-
4. Novelties
The results of this study are in the form of a process of interaction in the classroom in the form of utterances in a bilingual school which will later look at the constraints that occur in the utterances delivered. Later the findings in this study are in the form of interlanguage constraints which are analyzed using a language error analysis model according to pragmatic competence in the Indonesian language learning process. Empirical findings from interlanguage constraints in the form of language error analysis resulted in the development of learning strategies. This learning strategy will involve the development of an Indonesian language error analysis model based on pragmatic competence. This learning strategy follows learning topics that are adapted to the learning materials developed by the teacher in learning Indonesian. The error analysis model developed from pragmatic competence in learning interactions is based on linguistic category taxonomic elements, namely phonological, morphological, syntactical, and lexicon error elements.
The explanation of the order of the number of linguistic category errors in the process of learning Indonesian by foreign students shows the reality of interlanguage constraints. The following can be concluded as follows. The first position is occupied by the appearance of the number of linguistic category errors, namely syntax errors, namely as many as 14 data or 31%. One of the factors causing errors in syntax is the use of sentences that are affected by the structure of a foreign language. Examples such as the existence of word order errors in a sentence are mostly caused by the influence of a foreign language, or are literal translations from foreign language forms. Even though the structure of the Indonesian language is different from the structure of foreign languages. The field of sentence structure concerns the order of words and phrases in relation to its laws. In Indonesian, the word order follows the rules “diterangkan-menerangkan (DM)”, whereas in foreign languages, for example, English is patterned with the rules “menerangkan-diterangkan (MD) ”. The second position is the phonological error category with 12 data or 27%. The dominant errors in phonology made by foreign students are the omission or addition of certain phonemes. In addition, there are errors in word fragments in the utterances of Indonesian words. The third position is a morphological category error which amounts to 10 data or 22%. The dominant mistakes are the use of non-standard affixes or affixes and also the use of conjunctions. The fourth position is the lexicon category error of 9 data or 20% which is relatively small. This error is in the form of selecting a foreign lexicon into a sentence.
The current work is self-funding research. The author delivers his gratitudes to the editor of publisher for publishing this research.
References
Austin, John. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press Chaer, Abdul.1995. Sosiolinguistik: Perkenalan awal. Jakarta: PT. Rineka.
Corder, S.P. 1971. Idiosyncratic dialects en error analysis. Dalam Interlan-guage Review of
Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 9, 1971:115—23.
Corder, S.P. 1981. Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dulay, Heidi; Burt, Marina; Krashen, Stephen, 1982. Language Two. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Duranti, Alessandro. 2000. Linguistic Anthropology: University Press. Cambridge.
Gazdard.D. 1979. Pragmatics:implicature, preaposition, and logical form. London: Academic Press
Grice, H. Paul.1975. ‘Logic and Conversation’, dalam P.Cole, Syntax and Semantics : Speech Acts. New York : Academic Press, hal 41-58.
Han, Z-H. (2004) Fossilization: an investigation into advanced l2 learning of a typologically distant language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of London
James, Carl. 1980. Contrastive Analysis. New York : Longman Group Limited
John, P., Brooks, B., Schriever, U., 2018. Speech acts in professional maritime discourse: A pragmatic risk analysis of bridge team communication directives and commissives in full-mission simulation. Unpublished manuscript. Journal of Pragmatics 140 12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.11.013. Weserstr. 52, D-26931, Elsfleth,
Germany.
KBBI (Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia). Kamus versi online/daring (Dalam Jaringan). di akses pada 16 Februari. 2023. https://kbbi.web.id/didik
Keraf, Gorys. 1994. Diksi dan Gaya Bahasa. Jakarta: PT Gramedia Utama
1996. Tata Bahasa Indonesia. Cetakan kesepuluh. Jakarta: Ikrar
Mandiri Abadi.
Kridalaksana, Harimurti.1985. Fungsi Bahasa dan Sikap Bahasa. Ende Flores : Nusa Indah Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press Levinson, Stephen N. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Levinson and Brwon. 1987. Question and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
May,Jacob L. 1993. Pracmatics An Introduction. Cambridge : Blackwell Publishers
Moleong, Lexy. J. 2000. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya Offset.
Nawawi. 1994. Penelitian Terapan. Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada University Press.
Nadar. FX. 2009. Pragmatik dan Penelitian Pragmatik. Yogyakarta : Graha Ilmu
Primantari dan Wijana. 2017. “Tindak Tutur Meminta oleh Pembelajar BIPA dari Korea: Kajian Pragmatik Bahasa Antara (INTERLANGUAGE PRAGMATICS)”. Jurnal Penelitian Humaniora, Vol. 18, No. 1, Februari 2017: 27-40.Muhammadiyah University Press
Rahardi, Kunjana. 2005. Pragmatik Kesantunan Imperatif Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Erlangga. Saeed, J. I. (1997). Semantics. Blackwell publisher.
Searle. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press.
Selinker, L. 1972. Interlanguage. Dalam Interlanguage Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 10, 1972: 209─231.
Selinker, L. dan U. Lakshmanan. 1992. Language transfer and fossilization: the ‘Multiple Effects Principles’. Dalam S. Gass dan L. Selinker (ed.) Language Transfer in Language Learning. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 197─216.
Selinker, L. 1997. Rediscovering Interlanguage. London: Longman.
Setyawati, Nanik. 2010. Analisis Kesalahan Berbahasa Indonesia. Surakarta: Yuma Pressindo
Sudaryanto. 1993. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa: Pengantar Penelitian Wahana Kebudayaan secara Linguistis. Yogyakarta: Duta Wacana University Press.
Tarigan, H.G. (2011). Pengajaran Analisis Kesalahan Berbahasa. Bandung: Angkasa.
Tarigan, H.G. (2015). Pengajaran pragmatik. Bandung: Angkasa.
Weinreich, Uriel. 1979. Language In Contacts. Publications of the Linguistic Circle of New York
Wijana, I Dewa Putu.2004. “Relasi bahasa dan Budaya serta Berbagai Permasalahannya”, Semiotika. Volume 5, No. 2/2004, hal. 107.
Yule, George. 2002. Pragmatics. Oxford : Oxford University Press
Biography of Author
Eka Dwi Putra, S.Pd., M.Hum. was born in Tabanan on Februari 25th, 1986. He is lecturer in STKIP Agama Hindu Amlapura Bali, Department of English Program, Indonesia ID 2090111007 Ph. +6281805356182. He graduated his bachelor degree in the English Department of Ganesha University of Education in 2009. He finished his master degree in the postgraduate program, magister program, linguistic studies, Warmadewa University in 2020. He currently is completing his dissertation at Udayana University.
Email: depe0254@gmail.com
Discussion and feedback