Transitivity Analysis of Hortatory Exposition Written by Third Years Student of English Education Program at Universitas Negeri Padang.

Frisca Yolanda; M. Zaim

doi:10.24036/jelt.v10i1.111518

Transitivity Analysis of Hortatory Exposition Written by Third Years Student of English Education Program at Universitas Negeri Padang.

Frisca Yolanda⁽¹⁾, M. Zaim⁽²⁾,
(1) Universitas Negeri Padang

Indonesia
(2) Universitas Negeri Padang

Indonesia

Corresponding Author
Copyright (c) 2021 Frisca Yolanda

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24036/jelt.v10i1.111518

Full Text:

Language : en

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to find out types of process and the most dominant process types of transitivity system, and to find out types of circumstances and the most dominant types of circumstances in Hortatory Exposition Text written by the third year student of English Education Program at Universitas Negeri Padang. The data of this research were collected through a writing test on hortatory exposition. It found 866 clauses that were obtained from 23 texts of hortatory exposition texts. The result of this research was that six types of processes occurred in the text. There were material process (59%), mental process (12%), relational process (23%), behavioral process (2%), verbal process (2%), and existential process (3%). It was found that types of material processes were the dominant process found in students' writing. Also, the result of this research found eight types of circumstances, there were Extent (6%), Location (36%), Manner (24%), Cause (26%), Accompaniment (4%), role (2%), matter (1%) and Angel (1%). The dominant types of circumstances were Location. It indicates that the characteristics of hortatory exposition text are using the material process and circumstances of Location.

Keywords

writing, hortatory exposition text, functional grammar, transitivity analysis

References

Eggins, S. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum.

Feez, S., & Joyce, H. (1998). Writing Skill Narrative and Non-Fiction Text Types. Melbourne: Phoenix Education.

Gay, L.R., Mills ,G.E., Airasian, P. (2009). Educational Research. United States of America.

Geraldine, M., Sutapa, Y., Gatot , Y., & Surmiyati, S. (2014). Teaching Writing Hortatory Exposition Text Through Task-based Language Teaching (Tblt). Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Khatulistiwa, 3(8)1-12.

Gerrot, L., &Wignell, P. (1994). Making Sense of Functional Grammar : An Introductory work Book. Sydney : Antipodean Educational Enterprises.

Marbun, L. A. Y. (2016) Process Types of Transitivity System in the National Geographic’s Articles. The Episteme Journal of linguistics and literature, 3 (1) 1-25.

Nassaji, H. (2015). Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis. Language Teaching Research, 19(2) 129-132.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching.New York : Mc Graw Hill.

Panggabean, C. I. (2011). Functional Gramar (An Introsuction to Metafunctional Components of Language). Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra, 46-62.

Simons, H. W. (1976). Persuasion: understanding, practice, and analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung : Alfabeta, CV.

Wahyuni1,R., Hamzah, H., & Wahyuni, D. (2019). An Analysis of Transitivity System In Memoirs Written By EFL Students.E-Journal of English Language and Literature, 8(1)150-157.