Analysis of Theme in Discussion Text Written by the Second Year Students of English Department of UNP

Susi Guslita Putri; Rusdi Noor Rosa

doi:10.24036/jelt.v9i4.110560

Analysis of Theme in Discussion Text Written by the Second Year Students of English Department of UNP

Susi Guslita Putri⁽¹⁾, Rusdi Noor Rosa⁽²⁾,
(1) Universitas Negeri Padang

Indonesia
(2) Universitas Negeri Padang

Indonesia

Corresponding Author
Copyright (c) 2020 Susi Guslita Putri

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24036/jelt.v9i4.110560

Full Text:

Language : en

Abstract

This research aims at finding out the type of theme dominantly used in the students’ discussion texts written by the second year students of English Department of Universitas Negeri Padang. This study used a descriptive research method. The population of this research was the second year students of English Department of Universitas Negeri Padang. They were selected because they had taken a course on essay writing. The sample was 30 students taken using a cluster random sampling. The data were collected using a test that has been administered twice in order to get the more representative data. The results show that the dominant theme types used in the students’ discussion text are simple unmarked theme (44.61 %), and multiple unmarked theme (42.35 %), and the types of theme least frequently used are simple marked theme (10.14 %), and multiple marked theme (2.90 %). The dominant used of unmarked theme is motivated by the students’ desire to emphasize on the points of the arguments which are indicated by used of nominal groups

Keywords

Discussion Text, Theme and Rheme,

References

Al Bakaa, A., J. (2015) Functional Analysis of Marked and Unmarked Theme in Demonstrating a Critical Argument Written by Iraqi and Australian Posgraduate Students. School of Education, Monash University : Australia.

Anderson, M. & Anderson, K. (1997).Text types in English 1. South Yarra: Macmillan.

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

Boardman, C.A. &Frydenberg, J. (2002).Writing to communicate: Paragraph and essays. 2nd Edition. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Butt, David et al. (2000).Using functional grammar: An explorer’s guide. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.

Gay, L. R., Mills, G.E. & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational Research Competencies for Analysis and Application Sixth Edition. New jersey : prentice hall inch

Gunawan, W. & Aziza, F. (2017). Theme and thematic progression of undergraduate thesis: Investigating meaning making in academic writing. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 7(2), pp. 413-424.

Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar.3th edition. London and New York: Routledge.

Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jing, W. (2015).Theme and thematic progression in English writing teaching.Journal of Education and Practice, Vol. 6(21), pp. 178-187.

Langan, J. (1997). College Writing Skills with Readings. New York: The McGrow-Hill Companies, Inc.

Rijlaarsdam, G., Bergh, H., &Couzijn, M.(Eds.) (2004). Effective learning and teaching of writing: A handbook of writing in education second education. Berlin: Springer.

Rosa, R. N. (2007a). Thematic progression as a means to keep cohesion in exposition texts. JurnalBahasadanSeni, Vol. 8(2), pp. 94-100.

Rosa, R. N. (2007b). Analisis fungsi tekstual dalam surat kabar harian “Haluan”. Lingua Didaktika: Jurnal Bahasa dan Pembelajaran Bahasa 1(1), 56-65

Rosa, R. N. (2013). Thematic progression as a model used to keep cohesion in writing an exposition text. SELT 2013 Proceeding, pp. 220-228.

Rustipa, K. (2010). Theme-rheme organization of learners’ texts. DinamikaBahasadanIlmuBudaya, Vol.4, pp. 1-17.

Wang, L. (2007). Theme & rheme in the thematic organization of text: Implications for teaching academic writing. Asian EFL Journal. Vol. 9(1), pp. 164-176.

Witte, S. P. &Faigley, L. (1981).Coherence, cohesion, and writing quality.College Composition and Communication, Vol. 32(2), pp. 189-204.

Yang, X. (2008).Thematic progression analysis in teaching explanation writing.English Language Teaching, Vol. 1(1), pp. 29-33.

Yunita, S. (2017). Theme and thematic progression in students’ recount text, Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics,Vol 7(3),pp.524-530.

Syahrizal, T., Fitrian, L. &Anggraeni, N. (2018). Thematic progression analysis of students writing. Jurnal Siliwangi: Seri Pendidikan, Vol 4(1), pp. 41-53.