Indonesian Interference in Students' Japanese Essays of SMK Penerbangan Cakra Nusantara School
on
e-Journal of Linguistics
Available online at https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol/index
Vol. 14, No. 2, July 2020, pages: 232-241
Print ISSN: 2541-5514 Online ISSN: 2442-7586
https://doi.org/10.24843/e-jl.2020.v14.i02.p07
Indonesian Interference in Students' Japanese Essays of SMK Penerbangan Cakra Nusantara School
Putu Devi Ayu Andari Denpasar, Indonesia [email protected]
Article info
Received Date: March 3, 2020
Accepted Date: March 9, 2020
Published Date: July 31, 2020
Keywords:*
interference, Indonesian, Japanese essay.
Abstract*
This research discusses Indonesian language interference that occurs in Japanese essays written by SMK Penerbangan Cakra Nusantara students. This research aims to describe the types of interference found in the form of sentences in students' essays. This research used qualitative descriptive. The subject of this research are students of XII APP 1 class, meanwhile the object of this research are interference sentences in Japanese essays. The data was collected through note taking technique. The data was analysed using a theory proposed by Miles and Hubberman by performing data reduction, analysing data, and making conclusions. The results of this research are 1) the types of interference that occured based on linguistic aspects are morphological and syntactic interference; and 2) syntactic interference occured in three types of interference such as permutation of core constituents (I) and modifier (M), permutation of predicate (P) and object (O), and ommision of particles (joshi).
As a language learner, especially a foreign language, people often make mistakes caused by the influence of their L1. The L1 greatly affected the learners because they are equating the rules of the L2 with their L1. The process of using different languages interchangeably by the same speaker makes a language contact situation. Through language contact, there is influence between the L1 and the L2 or vice versa, it will be easier if the structure of the L1 and L2 has many similarities or can inhibit the learning of the L2 if the structure of the L1 and L2 is very different. The different structures between the L1 and the L2 can lead to errors in the use of the second language that is referred as interference.
Language interference according to Weinreich (1970) is a form of deviation in the use of language from existing norms as a result of language contact or recognition of more than one language and used interchangeably by its speakers. According to Kridalaksana (2001) interference is a language error in the form of the language elements brought into the language or other dialects they learned.
Interference is a deviation in bilingualism in the L2 learning stage. Interference occurs due to the dominance of the L1 system that influences the use of L2 in events of communication, emotions, sensitivity, and attitudes of the speakers (Mustikawati, 2013). Interference can be
found in all components of language, it means that interference events can occur in phonology, morphology, syntax, lexicon, and semantics (Suwito, 1983: 55).
Jendra (1991) divides interference into five based on linguistic aspects.
-
1) Phonological interference is interference that occurs in sound systems for example Javanese speakers who pronounce names starting with / b /, / d /, / g / and / j / like bandung becomes /mbandUŋ/.
-
2) Morphological interference is interference in word formation including the use of affixes.
-
3) Syntactic interference is interference in sentence structure.
-
4) Lexicon interference is interference that occurs in vocabulary in various forms such as in basic words, levels of groups of words, or phrases.
-
5) Semantic interference is interference that occurs in the level of meaning. Semantic interference divided into three (1) expansion semantics, (2) addition semantics, (3) replacement semantics.
Interference often occurs in someone who learn a foreign language. The interference of the Indonesian language into the use of Japanese is found in the essays of senior high school students who study Japanese. The example is the phrase neko no oneesan which is supposed to be oneesan no neko which means ‘cat (belonging) brother’. There is a permutation between the controlled named head (H) and the being controlled named modifier (M) due to the influence of the Indonesian phrase structure. Indonesian phrase structure is the head (H) always precedes the modifier (M), while the phrase in Japanese the modifier (M) always precedes the head (H) (Sutedi, 2003). This interference is the type of syntactic interference.
Interference often occurs in speaking and writing skills. This is because speaking and writing are the active productive skill which is to produce expressions verbally or in writing (Sudipa, 2011). Thus, interference often found in these two language skills. Between these two language skills, writing skill is the focus of the research because the interference that students made often found in writing rather than speaking.
The research about language interference was conducted by Wulandari (2017) entitled Interference in "The Use of Japanese Souvenir Traders in the Ubud Market". The results of the research show that there are three types of Indonesian language interference into Japanese languange by sellers in the Ubud market. The type of the interference are phonological interference, morphological interference, and lexical interference. Phonological interference occurs in chouon (long vowels), youon (adding smaller version of ya, yu or yo), sokuon (double consonant), nasal consonant, and consonant addition. Morphological interference occurs in reduplication of words, changes in form and reversal of sentence structure. Lexical interference occurs in borrowing English and Indonesian when promoting merchandise, making transactions and ending transactions. Research conducted by Wulandari (2017) is the interference in speaking skill, while this research is on writing skills.
Other research on language interference was conducted by Suliman (2014) entitled “The Interference of Mother Tongue/Native Language in One's English Language Speech Production”. The study was aimed to describe the factors that cause interference to students in Malaysia. The result from the research that students rely on translation method from the mother tongue in comprehending certain instructions apart from producing utterances. The research conducted by Suliman (2014) is an interference in speaking skill. In addition, the research focuses on describing the factors causing interference in students who learn English while this research focuses on interference that occur in Japanese essays of SMK Penerbangan Cakra Nusantara students.
Other research on language interference was conducted by Thyab (2016) entitled "Mother-Tongue Interference in the Acquisition of English Articles by L1 Arabic Students". The
research discusses the interference that occurs in Arab students who learn English, especially in the article system in English. The difficulty in learning English articles by Arabic L1 speakers is because their native language has an article system that functions differently. There are three types of the interference (1) omission of the definite article, (2) omission of the indefinite article, (3) wrong insertion of the definite article “the”. The research focused on interference in the use of articles in English, while this study focuses on morphological and syntactic interference in Indonesian language in Japanese essays.
The previous research that has similar focus with this research is Gapur (2013) entitled “Interferensi Gramatikal Bahasa Indonesia dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa Jepang di Universitas Sumatera Utara”. The research discusses grammatical interference in students who learn Japanese language. The results obtained that there are four types of grammatical interference 1) interference (DM and MD) 40.62%, 2) ommision of particle (joshi) 31.25%, 3) form of verb conjunctions 18.75%, and 4) grammatical interference S-K-O-P forms 9.38%.
The previous research can be used as a reference for this research. This research gives some information for teachers about deficiencies on aspects of writing Japanese essays found in students. Thus, the teacher can choose the best learning model or method or special technique that is suitable to solve the problem. Based on the problem, this research takes the topic of interference entitled “Indonesian Language Interference in Japanese Language Essays of SMK Penerbangan Cakra Nusantara Students”.
This research is a qualitative research with a qualitative descriptive approach. The subjects of the study were the 22 students of class XII APP 1 SMK Penerbangan Cakra Nusantara. The XII APP 1 class was chosen as the research subject since many Indonesian language interference in Japanese essay found in this class. The object of this research are interference sentences in Japanese essays.
The sentences which contain interference were taken from students' essays and collected in data table according to the types of interference. The data was collected through observation method and note taking technique. The results of students' essays were observed by taking note those sentences which contain the interference. The data was analysed using a theory proposed by Miles and Hubberman by performing data reduction, analysing data, and making conclusions.
Based on the theory of Miles and Hubberman (1984) data in the form of sentences that contain interference were collected then followed by data reduction process. Data reduction is done by summarizing, focusing the main points, and selecting important data to be analysed. The data presentation is done by describing a set of analysis descriptively and taking conclusions.
Informal method is used in this research to present the data analysis. The informal method is a method of presenting analysis using words and sentences in the form of discourse (Sudaryanto, 2015).
Based on the data collected through the note-taking technique, the sentences contain Indonesian language interference in Japanese essays from SMK Penerbangan Cakra Nusantara students are grouped into two types namely morphological and syntactic interference. Morphological and syntactic interference are described as follows.
-
3.1 Morphological Interference
Morphological interference is interference in the formation of words including morphemes that form the words. Interference that found in students’ Japanese essays is verb morphology. There are gokan and gobi in Japanese verb morphology. Gokan is a morpheme that shows its lexical meaning, while gobi is a morpheme that shows its grammatical meaning (Sutedi, 2003). The final marker or gobi is connected behind the basic word is a very strong form that merge the basic word, gobi is a marker of time, affirmation, and negation.
Japanese bound morphemes are also called auxiliary verb. This morpheme function is to give more meaning on the basis of verbs. For example, the verb in the -masu form tabemasu means ‘eat’, {tabe-} is referred to as unchanged gokan and {-masu} is the conjugated part called gobi. Gobi {-masu} can be conjugated according to the purpose of the speakers. For example, to explain the past activities ‘eat’ gobi {-masu} was changed to {-mashita} so that it became tabe-mashita which means ‘eat (past)’. Examples of verbs form -masu are used because the verbs form which taught for high school students are the -masu form. Here are morphological interference data found in students' essays.
(01) Senshuu doubutsuen e ikimasu. (False)
Senshuu doubutsuen e ikimashita. (True)
‘I went to the zoo last week’.
Morphological interference is shown in the word ikimasu which means ‘to go’. The adverb of time is explained by senshuu which means ‘last week’, so that the verb should be turned into past form. The past form of ikimasu verb is ikimashita. However, students wrote ikimasu which means the sentence still does not show past activities. The -masu form indicates the activities that will happen, while to explain past activities the verb should be changed to the – mashita form.
(02) Kinou tomodachi wa uchi e kimasu. (False)
Kinou tomodachi wa uchi e kimashita. (True)
‘My friend came to my house yesterday’
Data (3-2) is also the type of morphological interference. In this sentence, morphological interference is indicated by the word kimasu which means ‘to come’. The interference found in conjugation of verb should be in past form. The adverb of the time is explained by the word kinou which means 'yesterday' so that the verb should also be followed by past form. The gobi {-masu} in the kimasu should be changed to {-mashita} so it will turn into kimashita which means ‘came’.
(03) Yuube eiga o mimasu. (False)
Yuube eiga o mimashita. (True)
‘I watched movie last night’
Morphological interference in data (3-3) is indicated by the word mimasu which means ‘to watch’. The adverb of time is explained by yuube which means 'last night', based on that the verb should follow the adverb of time into the past form. The past form of mimasu verb is mimashita. In the sentence, it is written mimasu which means the sentence still does not indicate past activity. The –masu form still indicates the activity that will happen, while to explain past activity the verb should be changed to –mashita form.
Based on these three data analyzed, it can be concluded that there was an Indonesian interference in student Japanese essays. The errors occurred because students are still influenced by the Indonesian system which does not need to change verbs into past form. Students explain
past activities only with adverb of time, meanwhile in Japanese explaining past activities should change the verb into the past form.
Syntactic interference is interference caused by the arrangement of L2 sentences that are influenced by the sentence structure of the L1. Syntactic interference occurs from the use of syntactic structure of the L1 while using the L2. Syntax is one of grammar that discusses the formation of sentences, clauses, and phrases (Ramlan, 1987: 21). Based on the theory, syntactic interference is found in sentences, clauses and phrases. In this research syntactic interference occured in sentences and phrases.
Typologically according to Tsujimura (1996) the structure of Japanese sentences is S-O-P (Subject-Object-Predicate), which is the predicate found at the end of the sentence. Japanese has S-O-P structure so that objects always followed by predicate, while Indonesian has an S-P-O (Subject-Predicate-Object) structure that is the predicate followed by the object (Alwi et al, 2003). Based on the statement, it can be seen that the sentence structure between Japanese and Indonesian has significant differences. The significant differences between Japanese and Indonesian are shown in the order of predicates and objects.
The significant differences cause errors in the order of Japanese sentences because they are still influenced by the structure of the Indonesian language. In addition, the pattern of phrase formation in Japanese is also different from Indonesian. The structure of Japanese phrases is the modifier (M) in front of the main phrase/head (H) (Koizumi, 1993). Modifier (M) is a word that explains, while the head (H) is the main of the phrase (e.g ‘red car’ phrase). In Japanese ‘red’ is akai while in Indonesian merah. In Japanese ‘car’ is kuruma while in Indonesian mobil. akai kuruma
-
(M) (H) (Japanese)
mobil merah
-
(H) (M) (Indonesian)
The akai ‘red’ adjective as the attribute that describing the kuruma ‘car’ noun. The akai ‘red’ attribute is used to explain the head constituent (H), kuruma ‘car’. From this description it can be concluded that the core phrase (H) in Japanese is in behind, while the formation of the Indonesian phrase is the core phrase (H) that is always in front of the modifier (M).
Syntactic interference in student essays consists of three types: (1) permutation of core phrase (H) and modifiers (M), (2) permutations of predicate (P) and objects (O), and (3) omission of particles (joshi). Here is the analysis based on the type of syntactic interference.
Permutation of the core phrase (H) and modifier (M) is incorrect word order in the sentence. This type of interference is shown in the following data.
(04) Heya no watashi wa kirei desu. (False)
Watashi no heya wa kirei desu. (True)
‘My room is clean’
Watashi no heya (Japanese)
-
(M) (H)
Heya no watashi
‘Kamar saya’ (Indonesian)
-
(H) (M)
Interference is shown on the phrase heya no watashi with each meaning, heya is 'room', no is a particle to express ownership and watashi is 'I'. Heya is the main phrase (H) and watashi is the modifier (M) as the word that explain the noun heya ‘room’. Students translate ‘my room’ into Japanese directly without noticing that in Japanese the main phrase/head (H) should be in behind the modifier (M).
In this phrase students are still influenced by Indonesian to express noun phrases by stating the main phrase (H) first and followed by a modifier (M). Based on this, to express 'my room' in Japanese it should be watashi no heya. From this data it can be seen clearly the influence of Indonesian in Japanese sentences. Another data also shows Indonesian language interference in Japanese essays, as follows.
(05) Tsukue no ue ni pen aoi ga futatsu arimasu. (False) Tsukue no ue ni aoi pen ga futatsu arimasu. (True) ‘There are two blue pen on the table’
|
Aoi |
pen |
(Japanese) |
|
(M) |
(H) | |
|
Pen |
aoi | |
|
‘Pulpen |
biru’ |
(Indonesian) |
|
(H) |
(M) |
Interference is shown on the aoi pen phrase with each means pen is 'pen' and aoi is 'blue'. Pen is main phrase (I) and aoi is an attribute that explains pen as modifier (M). It is categorized as Indonesian interference because the main phrase (H) and modifier (M) influenced by Indonesian phrase structure. In Indonesian the main phrase (H) is always in front of the modifier (M), but in Japanese the main phrase (H) is always behind the modifier (M). So that, to express the correct 'blue pen' in Japanese is aoi pen.
(06) Heya ni neko kawai ga imasu. (False)
Heya ni kawai neko ga imasu. (Benar)
‘There is a cute cat in room’
Kawai neko (Japanese)
(M) (H)
Neko kawai
‘Kucing lucu’ (Indonesian)
-
(H) (M)
Interference in the (3-5) is shown in the kawai neko phrase with each meaning, neko means 'cat' and kawai means ‘cute’. Neko is a main constituent (H) and kawai as a modifier (M). As shown in data (3-6), the main phrase (H) which is stated by the neko is in front of the modifier (M) which is stated by the word kawai. Based on the data (3-6), it shows incorrect word order which influenced by Indonesian. In Indonesian, the main phrase/head (H) is always ahead of the modifier (M), while in Japanese the main phrase (H) is always behind by the modifier (M). Based on this, to express the 'cute cat' in correct Japanese is kawai neko.
Based on these three data presented, one of the syntactic interference types is permutation main phrase (H) and modifier (M). Permutation is an error in word order. This interference occurred because students are still influenced by the rules of phrase structure in Indonesian. Students translate directly from Indonesian into Japanese without noticing that the formation of phrases between these two languages is different.
Permutation of a predicate and object is an error in word order in sentence. In Indonesian the predicate always precedes the object, whereas in Japanese the object followed by the predicate. These differences caused mistakes in Japanese students' essays which are categorized in syntactic interference. Syntactic interference in student essays is shown in the following data.
(07) Mai-asa tabemasu o pan. Mai-asa pan o tabemasu. ‘I eat bread every morning’ Pan o tabemasu
(False) (True)
(Japanese)
(Indonesian)
-
(O) (Part.) (P)
Tabemasu o pan
‘Makan roti’
-
(P) (Part.) (O)
Interference is shown on tabemasu o pan which has each meaning, tabemasu means ‘to eat’, particle o as a object marker, and pan means ‘bread’. Tabemasu as a predicate in the sentence and pan as an object. In that sentence has S-P-O structure that is the sentence structure of Indonesian, while the sentence structure in Japanese is S-O-P. That sentence should be in S-O-P structure. From the sentence we can see the existence of Indonesian language interference in Japanese sentence.
From the data we can see that students are still influenced by the structure of Indonesian sentences. There is permutation between the predicate and the object, it can be seen seen from incorrect order of object and predicate. Interference in this form is also shown in the following data.
(08) Mai-ban 8 ji ni mimasu o terebi. (Salah)
Mai-ban 8 ji ni terebi o mimasu. (Benar)
‘I watch TV at 8 p.m every night’ Terebi o mimasu (Japanese)
-
(O) (Part.) (P)
Mimasu o terebi (Indonesian)
-
(P) (Part.) (O)
Syntactic interferences in the form of permutations of predicates and objects are shown in mimasu o terebi. Each of the meanings of mimasu o terebi, mimasu means ‘to watch’, particle o as an object marker and terebi means ‘television’. Mimasu in this sentence as predicate and terebi as object.
The error is incorrect word order between the predicate and object. This is a form of error caused by students' L1. The position of predicates and objects in Japanese and Indonesian sentences is very different. Predicate precede objects in Indonesian, while Japanese objects precede predicate. Based on that, to state 'watching television' in correct Japanese is terebi o mimasu. Based on the data presented, it can be seen that an error occurred in writing a Japanese essay, especially in this sentence, shows that the error occurred because students are still influenced by Indonesian. This is what is called language interference.
-
3.2.3 Omission of Particles (Joshi)
Particles in Japanese have important functions as auxiliary words in sentences. According to Iori (2003) particle (joshi) is a word that cannot stand by itself, does not change and it is used to follow nouns, verbs and other word classes that have the function of helping and determining meaning, emphasis, questions, doubts, etc. in a Japanese sentence. Based on this statement the particle function in a sentence is very important and cannot be eliminated. Particle is also a special feature of Japanese from other languages.
Indonesian do not need particles to make a sentence. Japanese particles are something unusual for students. That is the causes interference found in sentences in Japanese students' essays. Here are the interferences of omission of particles (joshi).
(09) Kesa 6 ji okimashita. (False)
Kesa 6 ji ni okimashita. (True)
-
‘I woke up this morning at 6 a.m’
Interference in the sentence is indicated by the omission of the particle ni after the word ji. It should be ni particle after word ji. Japanese particles have different functions. Ni particle has functions to indicate the location or presence, declare time, show facing or heading or put in a direction or place and also shows the intended object (Iori, 2003). Based on this statement, it should be after 6 ji 'at 6' must be followed by ni particle to express the time, so that the appropriate statement to state ‘at 6’ in Japanese is 6 ji ni.
The omission of these particles is due to the influence of the Indonesian when making sentences in Japanese. Students do not fully understand the use of particles in Japanese and eliminate particles that should be in the sentence. It is because Indonesian sentences do not need particles. Here is another data that also shows the syntactic interference in the type of omission particle.
-
(10) Mai-nichi gohan tabemasu. (False)
Mai-nichi gohan o tabemasu. (True)
‘I eat rice everyday’
Interference that found in the data is omission of particle o after the word gohan. Gohan means 'rice' and tabemasu means 'to eat'. The function of gohan and tabemasu are object and predicate in the sentence. The sentence needs particle o as an auxiliary word to explain the object of verb. Based on data (3-10), students did not insert o particles after the word gohan. The missing particles is because students are not familiar with the Japanese language system. This is influenced by the Indonesian as their L1. There is no particle needed to explain the object from the verb. Based on this error, it is categorized as Indonesian interference in Japanese sentences.
This study takes and contributes to applied linguistic especially in linguistic teaching and learning. This research gives some information for teachers about deficiencies on aspects of writing Japanese essays found in students. Therefore, the teacher can choose the best learning model or method or special technique that is suitable to solve the problem. From this research it can be found there are two types of interference based on the linguistic aspects, morphological and syntactic interference. Morphological interference was found in the form of conjugation of Japanese verbs into the past form. Syntactic interference was also found which are divided into three forms, (1) permutation of main phrase/head (H) and modifier (M), (2) permutation of predicate (P) and object (O), (3) omission of particles (joshi).
Based on the results and discussion, it can be concluded that the Indonesian interference found in Japanese essays in SMK Penerbangan Cakra Nusantara students. There are two types of interference based on the linguistic aspects, morphological and syntactic interference. Morphological interference was found in the form of conjugation of Japanese verbs into the past form. Syntactic interference was also found and divided into three forms, (1) permutation of main phrase/head (H) and modifier (M), (2) permutation of predicate (P) and object (O), (3) omission of particles (joshi). Syntactic interference is occurred more than morphological interference.
This interference occurred because of the strong influence of the Indonesian when studying Japanese, the Indonesian system was applied in Japanese. The language rules between Indonesian and Japanese are so different so that the errors can affect the meaning in Japanese. For this reason, it is necessary to apply an appropriate learning model to reduce interference made by students.
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Prof. Dr. Made Budiarsa, M.A. and Dr. I Made Madia, M.Hum., my research supervisors, for their patient guidance, enthusiastic encouragement and useful critiques for this research.
References:
Alwi, et al. 2003. Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Pusat Bahasa dan Balai Pustaka.
Gapur, A. 2013. “Interferensi Gramatikal Bahasa Indonesia dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa Jepang di Universitas Sumatra Utara”. Seminar Nasional Dinamika Perkembangan Bahasa Jepang di Indonesia. Yogyakarta 9 Desember.
Iori, I., Takanashi, S. 2003. Nihongo Bunpou Hando Bukku. Tokyo: Suriieenettowokku.
Jendra, I.W. 1991. Dasar-Dasar Sosiolinguistik. Denpasar: Ikayana.
Koizumi, Tamotsu. 1993. Gengogaku Nyumon. Tokyo: Daishuukan.
Kridalaksana, H. 2001. Kamus Linguistik Edisi ketiga. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Mustikawati, D.A. 2013. “Interferensi Bahasa Indonesia ke dalam Pemakaian Bahasa Inggris
Wacana Tulis Siswa di RSMPBI 1 Jetis Ponorogo”. Dimensi Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran. Vol. 2. No. 1. Page 1-20. ISSN: 2303-3800.
Ramlan. 1987. Sintaksis Ilmu Bahasa Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Karyono.
Sudaryanto. 2015. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa: Pengantar Penelitian Wahana Kebudayaan secara Linguistis. Yogyakarta: Duta Wacana University Press.
Sudipa, I.N., Rajeg, I.M., Laksminy, L.P. 2011. Interferensi Pengaruh Bahasa Indonesia dalam Bahasa Inggris. Denpasar: Udayana University Press.
Sutedi, Dedi. 2003. Dasar-dasar Linguistik Bahasa Jepang. Bandung: Humaniora.
Suliman, A. 2014. “The Interference of Mother Tongue/Native Languange in One’s English Languange Speech Production”. International Journal of English and Education. Vol. 3. Issue. 3. Page 356-366. ISSN: 2278-4012.
Suwito. 1983. Pengantar Awal Sosiolinguistik Teori dan Problema. Surakarta: Hendry Offset Solo.
Thyab, R.A. 2016. “Mother-Tongue Interference in the Acquisition of English Articles by L1 Arabic Students”. Journal of Education and Practice. Vol. 7. No. 3. Page 1-4. ISSN: 2222-1735.
Tsujimura, N. 1996. An Introduction to Japanese Linguistics. UK: Blackwell Publisher.
Wulandari, N.K.A., Antartika, I.K., Sadyana, I.W. 2017. “Interferensi dalam Pemakaian Bahasa Jepang Pedagang Souvenir di Pasar Ubud”. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Jepang. Vol. 3. No. 3. Page 443-453. ISSN 2613-9618.
Weinreich, Uriel. 1970. Language in Contact Findings and Problems. Hague: Mouton.
Biography of Author
Putu Devi Ayu Andari, S.Pd Denpasar, Indonesia.
Discussion and feedback