UNDERSTANDING AND EVALUATING PERSONAL LETTER WRITING: A SYSTEMIC FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS ANALYSIS OF STUDENT TEXTS IN ONE OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL IN INDONESIA

Alfira Veronica Mangana, Eri Kurniawan

Abstract


Based on 2013 Curriculum, Personal Letter can be considered as one of the challenging text types that should be mastered by the students. This might be the reason why the text is taught in Senior High School Level. Therefore, it is crucial for the teachers to expand their knowledge regarding this type of genre to overcome students’ problems faced during writing personal letter. This study is aimed to analyse student’s Personal Letter text based on three metafunctions in SFL perspective. It is expected that by identifying students’ problems, teachers can decide and design appropriate pedagogical plan. The data of this descriptive qualitative study were analysed by using three metafunctions in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). The result of the study reveals that the student’s major problems in producing Personal Letter text are the use of subject and verb tense (interpersonal metafunctions), the generic structure of the text, the use of conjunctions, the grammatical errors, and L1 interference.

Keywords: personal letter; systemic functional linguistics; metafunction; discovery learning strategy.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Ali, A. & Tanzili. (2006). Pedoman lengkap mnulis surat. Jakarta: Kawan Pustaka

Al-Khatib, A., Mahmud. (2001). The pragmatics of letter-writing. World Englishes, 20(2), 179-200.

Anderson, M., & Anderson, K. (2003). Text Types in English 1. Australia: Macmillan. Barton, D., & Hall, N. (2000). Introduction. In D. Barton & N. Hall (Eds.), Letter writing as a social practice (pp. 1-14). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Bloor, M. (1996). Academic writing in computer science. In E. Ventola & A. Mauranen (Eds.), Academic writing: intercultural and textual issues (pp. 59-87). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

Bloor, T., & Bloor, M. (2004). The functional analysis of English: A Hallidayan approach (2nd ed.). London: Arnold.

Brown, H. (1935). The great American novel. American Literature: A Journal of Literary History, Criticism, and Bibliography, 7(1), 1-14.

Byram, K. (2011). Using the concept of perspective to integrate cultural, communicative, and form-focused language instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 44(3), 525-543.

Byrnes, H., Maxim, H. H., & Norris, J. M. (2010). Realizing advanced foreign language writing development in collegiate education: Curricular design, pedagogy, assessment. Modern Language Journal, 94 (MLJ Monograph Series).

Connor, U., & Mayberry, S. (1996). Learning discipline-specific academic writing: a case study of a Finnish graduate student in the United States. In E. Ventola & A. Mauranen (Eds.), Academic writing: Intercultural and textual issues (pp. 231-253). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

Crane, C. (2016). Understanding and evaluating L2 personal letter writing: A systemic functional linguistics analysis of student texts in German university of texas.

Cresswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Dirgeyasa, I. W. (2016). Genre-Based Approach: What and How to Teach and to Learn Writing. English Language Teaching, 9(9), 45-51.

Eggins, S. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. NY: Continuum. Ellis, J. (1987). The logical and textual metafunctions. In M.A.K. Halliday & R. Fawcett (Eds.), New developments in systemic linguistic, Volume 1: Theory and Description (pp. 107- 129). New York: Francis Pinter.

Emilia, E. (2014). Introducing Functional. Grammar.Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.

Faigley, L. (2006). The brief Penguin handbook: Custom edition for the department of English at Marshall University (2nd ed.). New York: Pearson Custom Publishing.

Fitzmaurice, S. M. (2002). The familiar letter in Early Modern English. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Fries, P. (1981). On the status of theme: Arguments from discourse. Forum Linguisticum, 6(1), 1- 38.

Fries, P. (1995). Theme, methods of development, and texts. In R. Hasan & P. Fries (Eds.), On subject and theme: A discourse functional perspective (pp. 317-359). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

Gee, J. P. (1998). What is literacy? In V. Zamel & R. Spack (Eds.), Negotiating academic literacies: Teaching and learning across languages and cultures (pp. 51-59). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gerot, L., & Wignell, P. (1995). Making Sense of Functional Grammar: An Introductory Workbook. Australia: Gerd Stabler.

Gregory, M. (1987). Meta-functions: aspects of their development, status and use in systemic linguistics. In M. A. K. Halliday & R. Fawcett (Eds.), New developments in systemic linguistic, Volume 1: Theory and Description (pp. 94-106). New York: Francis Pinter.

Hakim, M., Riswanto, R., & Rafiska, L. (2016). The Use of genre-based approach in the context of English foreign language curriculum development at Islamic schools in Indonesia people. International Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 1530-1539.

Halliday, M.A.K. and Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. (2014) Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London: Routledge.

Hamied, F. (2015). ELT Intricacies within the Indonesian language policy. English for ASEAN Integration: policies and practices in the region. Bandar Sri Begawan: IELTS.

Hamied, F. (2017). Research methods: A guide for first-time researchers. Bandung: UPI Press.

Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Malaysia: Pearson Education Limited.

Hasan, R. (1996). The nursery tale as a genre. In C. Cloran, D. Butt & G. Williams (Eds.), Ways of saying: Ways of meaning. Selected papers of Ruqaiya Hasan (pp. 51-73). New York: Cassell.

Hidayati, E., Sukam, D. & Antoni, R. (2015). Improving students’ writing skill in recount text by using personal letter at eight grade of SMP tiga hati kepenuhan hulu. English Study Program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Pasir Pengaraian.

Horn, B. (2011). The future is now: Preparing a new generation of CBI teachers. English Teaching Forum, 49(3), 2-9.

Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and second language writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture. (2016). Buku saku gerakan literasi. Jakarta: Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture.

Kearney, E. (2012). Perspective-taking and meaning-making through engagement with cultural narratives: Bringing history to life in a foreign language classroom. L2 Journal, 4(1), 58-82.

Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Modul pelatihan implementasi kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Badan Pengembangan Sumberdaya Manusia Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan dan Penjamin Mutu Pendidikan Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.

Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and language teaching. New York: Oxford University.

Kirkwood, R. (2006). Introductory letter. In The brief Penguin handbook: Custom edition for the department of English at Marshall University (2nd ed.). New York: Pearson Custom.

Knapp, P., & Watkins, M. (2005). Genre, text, grammar: Technologies for teaching and assessing writing. Sidney: UNSW Press.

Knutson, E. (2012). Teaching difficult topics: The example of the Algerian War. L2 Journal, 4(1), 83-101.

Maria N. & Katerina T. Frantzi. (2017). Genre identification based on SFL principles: The representation of text types and genres in English language teaching material. department of mediterranean studies, Greece. Corpus Pragmatics,1:373–392

Martin, J. R. (1991). Nominalization in science and humanities: Distilling knowledge and scaffolding text. In E. Ventola (Ed.), Functional and systemic linguistics (pp. 307–337), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.

Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. London: Equinox. Melissourgo,

Mortensen, L. (2005). Written discourse and acquired brain impairment: Evaluation of structural and semantic features of personal letters from a Systemic Functional Linguistic perspective. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19, 227-247.

Mulyasa. (2013). Pengembangan dan implementasi kurikulum 2013. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Nafisah, N., & Kurniawan,E. (2007). Writing English for general communication. Bandung: UPI Press

Noviyanti (2015). Thematic progression in students’ recount texts. E-Journal of English and Education, 3(2), 65-76.

Nurlaelawati, I., & Novianti, N. (2017). The practice of genre-based pedagogy in Indonesian schools: a case of pre-service teachers in Bandung, West Java province. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 160-166.

Nurohmah, I. (2013). An analysis of students’ recount text by using systemic functional grammar. Passage, 1(2), 89-98.

Paesani, K., Allen, H. W., & Dupuy, B. (2016). A multiliteracies framework for collegiate foreign language teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Piruat, J., & Lopez-Barneo, J. (2005). Oxygen tension regulates mitochondrial DNA-encoded complex I gene expression. The Journal of Biological Chemistry, 280(52), 42676-42684.

Taguchi, N. (2012). Context, individual differences and pragmatic competence. New York/Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Tardy, C. M., & Swales, J. M. (2014). Genre analysis. In K. P. Schneider & A. Barron (Eds.), Pragmatics of discourse (pp. 165–187). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.

Thompson, G. (2004). Introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). London: Arnold Publishers.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.25134/ieflj.v6i2.3385

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


View My Stats

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.