CONCLUSION OF THE FINDINGS [This material has been edited]

In general, this investigation has uncovered the challenges encountered by the students

who were the subjects of this study, recorded as hard copy. and the syntactic mistakes made by

those students, which demonstrated a high rate in types of action words, descriptive words,

articles, tenses, wrong-word decisions, relational words, and subject-action word understanding.

Under-studiers tended to generate their own interpretation when composing because of the

impact of L1 and Malay. They became bewildered about what the right type of sentence structure

was, the structure that was equivalent to the L1 and Malay. When this happened, under-studiers

committed errors which were then recorded as a hard-copy segment.

Conveying everything that needs to be conveyed in a second language isn't simple because the

obstruction from L1 continually occurs inside their cognitive functioning. Retention assists the

under-studiers to recall the punctuation shapes, however neglected, and to introject that recall

into the composing segment when various circumstances or different forms of writing are given

to them to compose. Here, under-studiers attended to the six grammatical problems identified as

central, and they concluded by producing an excessive number of tenses in a passage, an

outcome that seems to negate the message communicated in this section

I gathered information from educators in various schools of Bagh Azad Jammu and

Kashmir. For the most part, educators concurred that blunders in composed English made by the

under-studiers consisted of the following:

 1. errors in the use of verb forms

2. errors in the use of prepositions

3. errors in the use of pronouns

4. errors in the use of adjectives

5. errors in the use of articles

6. errors in the choice of verb tenses

The errors investigated in this study were mainly due to L1 interference; for example, faulty

translation methods and overgeneralization. Additionally, some of the errors resulted from

inadequate application of the target language. Literal translation from the mother tongue also

induced many errors among the learners.

Apart from the causes of the above-mentioned errors, there were many other causes. The learners

had little or no exposure to the written text of the target language. Faulty teaching techniques,

especially in the classrooms chosen as control groups, contributed causally to errors among the

learners. For example, teachers do not use visual aids in their classrooms, and they lack the

confidence to speak in English. Another noteworthy cause of errors lies with poor classroom

management, which helps explain why students do not take an interest in their studies and why

they badly neglect the teaching provided in their classrooms.

Finally, teachers were more focused on completion of the syllabus and tended to forget the

problems confronted by their students. Consequently, the problems did not stop with students

thoroughly learning one grammatical form; rather, these forms and the students learning them

rolled on to another class, with students facing the difficulties of learning too many forms and

not knowing which one was suitable to use. For example, writing a story should involve use of

past tense of verbs, but students tended to use simple present instead.
1 CONCLUSION OF THE FINDINGS [This material has been edited]
In general, this investigation has uncovered the challenges encountered by the students who were

the subjects of the study, recorded as hard copy, and the syntactic mistakes made by those

students, which demonstrated a high rate in these areas: types of action words, descriptive words,

articles, tenses, wrong-word decisions, relational words, and subject-action word understanding.

Under-studiers tended to generate their own interpretation when composing because of the

impact of L1 and Malay. They became confused about whether the right type of sentence

structure was equivalent to the L1 and Malay. At the point at which this happened, under-

studiers committed errors which were recorded as a hard-copy segment.

Conveying everything that needs to be conveyed in second language isn't simple because the

obstruction from L1 occurs continually inside their cognitive fields. Retention helps the under-

studiers to recollect the punctuation shapes, however neglected, and to apply the recalled shapes

into another composing segment whenever various circumstance or different kinds of writing

assignments are given to them. Here, under-studiers attended to the six grammatical problems

identified as central, and they concluded by producing an excessive number of tenses in a

passage, an outcome that seems to negate the message communicated in this section.

I gathered information from educators in various schools of Bagh Azad Jammu and

Kashmir. For the most part educators concurred that blunders in composed English made by the

understudies are the following:

 1. errors in the use of verb forms

2. errors in the use of prepositions

3. errors in the use of pronouns

4. errors in the use of adjectives

5. errors in the use of articles

6. errors in the choice of verb tenses

The errors investigated in this study were due mainly to L1 interference; for example, faulty

translation methods and overgeneralization. Some of the errors were also due to inadequate

application to the target language. Further, literal translation from the mother tongue also

induced many errors among the learners.

Apart from the direct causes of the errors mentioned above, there were additional causative

factors. The learners had only little or no exposure to the written text of the target language.

Faulty teaching techniques, especially in the classrooms whose students functioned as controls,

acted as an indirect cause of errors among the learners. Teachers failure to use visual aids in their

classrooms, teachers’ lack of confidence to speak English, and poor classroom management—all

these factors contributed to students’ failure to take an interest in their studies and their neglect

of what they were being taught.

Finally, teachers were more focused on completing the syllabus and tended to overlook the

problems faced by their students. Thus, the problems did not stop there with one grammatical

form; rather, they rolled on with the students to the next one. Students faced the difficulties of

learning too many grammatical forms and not knowing which one was suitable to use. For

example, although writing a story requires use of past tense, students tended to use simple

present tense instead.

CONCLUSION [This material has been edited]

This study focuses on part of the arrangement for perception, portrayal, arrangement, and

diagnosis of the syntactic bumbles made in the Emirati assistant male-understudies' English

papers, and on the wellsprings of these slip-ups. In similar ways, different assorted phonetic

errors were found in their English articles. These were limited to eight vital errors: standoffish

voice, tense and structure of activity-words, subject-activity word understanding, word demand,

social words, articles, dominant part, and partners. After the mix-ups had been separated, careful

analysis determined that the understudies make syntactic botches for two essential reasons: inter-

lingual and intra-lingual. The legitimate deduction to which the data leads is that Emirati male

understudies still have far to go before recording printed versions of appealing articles in

English. The way they composed their articles clearly exhibited their feeble handling of the key

structures of the English language.

It is the commitment of both outline designers and teachers of English to nourish the

understudies' arrangement aptitudes. School course-books should join even more free and

controlled structure rehearsals that would help improve understudies’ creation of limits. On the

other hand, teachers should vary their persuasive procedures to energize and engage their under-

studies to create skillfully. Serious errors in the training and formation of understudies could be

restricted if current frameworks in empowerment-making were secured and utilized. Obviously,

the blunders in language structure require more thought than the others. Teachers should be

aware of these sorts of logical errors and embrace the centrality of pursing work designed to

check problems in the issue zones previously described. In any case, EFL teachers and experts
cannot neglect regarding the failed examination as a key mechanical assembly that allows them

to familiarize themselves with the psycholinguistic strategies connected to learning an obscure

language.

The disclosures of this assessment reinforce the case that Arabic-talking understudies take

various syntactic missteps when creating compositions in English. Serious mistakes show that

EFL understudies depend upon inter-lingual and intra-lingual techniques to energize learning.

Such strategies help when there are events of obvious etymologically comparable qualities, but

lead to issues when there are events involving differences. Most of the off-kilter syntactic

sentences found in understudies’ works were related to intra-lingual failures. Syntactic ability

provides the foundation for better arrangement limits. Capable accentuation direction, especially

for adult understudies, helps EFL understudies learn English even more adequately (Valette,

1991). Consequently, understanding understudies' learning difficulties and providing appropriate

sentence-structure direction is the best approach to effective training for EFL teachers. In any

case, it is necessary for teachers to distinguish what the mix-up is when overseeing serious

blunders, to establish the potential wellsprings of key missteps, to explain why those missteps

occur, and to do all this in a way that demonstrates full comprehension of the whole process.

Understanding the purposes behind a serious error empowers the educator to work out an

undeniably suitable training strategy, to oversee understudies’ efforts, to determine how

certifiable the mistakes are, and whether they call for remedial work.
To close, comparison of our understudies' abilities in both Arabic and English clearly indicates

that some of the individuals' issues with the creation of English sentences can be associated with

significant set-up issues in the arrangement of Arabic word-patterns. After beginning there, this

study seeks to identify potential problems for those who care for the instructional needs of

understudies of English with regard to substance, as opposed to simply moving them along in the

educative process. This becomes achievable through encouragement and oversight of

understudies so that at a very basic level they look at legitimate works created in English by local

speakers, works which support their own one-of-a-kind arrangement along similar lines. At the

same time, the understudies will improve their general language capacity by following these

procedures. Regardless, these studies have dealt with a pre-determined number of etymological

points of view related to errors-making on grounds that such mistakes arise out of the

constrictions of location. Obviously, a great deal of work on this issue remains to be done.
[This material has not been edited]

Part of the arrangement for perceiving, portraying, arranging, and diagnosing the sort of syntactic

bumbles made in the Emirati assistant male understudies' English papers and the wellsprings of

these slip-ups. In like manner, different assorted phonetic errors were found in their English

articles. These were limited to eight vital errors: standoffish voice, activity word tense and

structure, subject-activity word understanding, word demand, social words, articles, dominant

part and partners. In the wake of separating the mix-ups, it has been found that the understudies

make syntactic botches in light of two essential reasons: Interlingual and intralingual reasons. It

would hence have the option to be contemplated that Emirati male understudies still have far to

go recorded as a printed copy pleasing articles in English. The way wherein they shaped their

articles indisputably exhibits their weak handle of the basic essentials of English language

structure. It is the commitment of both outline draftsmen and teachers of English to give

sustenance to the understudies' creation aptitudes. School course books should fuse even more

free and controlled creation rehearses that would help improve understudies forming limits. On

the other hand teachers should vary their urging techniques in order to support and engage their

understudies to create skillfully. I figure botches in understudies forming can be constrained if

present day methodology in teaching creating were grasped. Doubtlessly the botches in language

structure require more thought than the others. Educators should then be progressively aware of

these sorts of slip-ups and surrender the major pursue work to check the issue locales as

discussed previously. Nevertheless, EFL teachers and experts can't dismissal botch examination

as a huge gadget by which they can get comfortable with the psycholinguistic methods related

with the learning of an obscure lingo. The disclosures of this assessment reinforce the case that

Arabic-talking understudies present various syntactic botches when creating papers in English.
Errors demonstrate that EFL understudies depend upon interlingual and intralingual systems to

support learning. Such procedures help if there ought to be an event of seen semantic comparable

qualities and lead to issues if there ought to be an event of differentiations. An enormous part of

an inappropriate syntactic sentences found in understudies articles were relied upon to

intralingual goofs. Semantic ability is the foundation of better organization limit. Profitable

language direction, especially for adult understudies helps EFL understudies learn English even

more enough (Valette, 1991). Along these lines, understanding understudies' learning issues and

giving reasonable language structure direction is the best approach to convincing teaching for

EFL educators. In any case, in overseeing bumbles, it is huge for teachers to develop what the

mix-up is, to set up the potential wellsprings of slip-ups, to explain why they occur in light of the

fact that a full learning of the purposes behind a screw up enables the instructor to work out an

inexorably fruitful educating procedure to oversee them in conclusion to pick how certifiable the

oversight is to have a helpful work. To wrap up, interfacing our understudies' abilities in both

Arabic and English gathers that a bit of the individuals' issues in English forming can be

associated with the significant built up issues in Arabic sythesis. It seeks after beginning here

that understudies of English need also to be told about the English substance care instead of

moving. This should be conceivable by controlling understudies to look in a general sense and

deliberately at English works made by neighborhood speakers out of English which therefore

reinforces their own one of a kind structure. Simultaneously, the understudies will improve their

general language capacity by following these strategies. Regardless, this examination dealt with

a foreordained numbers of the semantic points related with making on the grounds that out of the

controls of presence. Clearly, there is a great deal of work to be done here later on.
RECOMMENDATIONS [This material has been edited]

In consideration of the outcomes of this study, several proposals are being advanced. Most

importantly, the aspirations of the understudies towards learning the English language should be

supported. Understanding the significance of English as a universal language currently being

spoken by everyone provides the foundation. However, talking is not by itself sufficient because

it is composing that will establish and determine the individual's familiarity with the language.

Instructors assume a significant job in assisting the learning process, so educators should utilize

an assortment of innovative approaches to demonstrate key linguistic concepts to their

understudies. For instance, consolidating language expressions and playing syntax games in

training will in general be progressively engaged in, and will ready understudies to catch on

quickly and to comprehend specific circumstances. The composing segment can be an

exhausting one to engage in; however, consolidation of that segment into exciting exercises

guarantees that the understudies' perspective is accurate and that subjective learning happens.

Intralingua move-speculation inside L2 needs to occur. In this way, understudies should be urged

to execute adjustments because this overcomes their slip-ups and because adapting as

circumstances require is the best way to utilize the recorded sentence structure as hard copy.

Enhancements that will raise the understudies' level to a higher one ought to be made known, and

teachers should become acquainted with such enhancements and refer to them as students learn.

Starting with the initial phase, they can progress easily to the next, and that progress gives them

the pride and the inspiration to learn and compose more effectively.
Mitchell and Myles (2004) claim that whenever such errors are considered, they can uncover a

discernible meaning-creating arrangement of the understudies’ L2language, and that this

framework is dynamic and open to changes and resetting of parameters. This view is upheld by

Start(2001: 19) in his investigation, which additionally clarified that educators need to view

understudies' mistakes open-mindedly: rather than seeing them as a reflection of the students'

inability to get a handle on linguistic principles and language structures, they should regard the

blunders as a necessary procedure in the learning process. He subscribes to the view that

blunders are ordinary and inescapable aspects of learning, including the fact that mistakes are

essential within the basic state of learning.

In this manner, educators ought to distinguish the mistakes made by their understudies and

characterize them into classes. They should realize that on occasion a few language structures

will overlap and that such overlap will befuddle understudies about which structure is the correct

one. By pointing out these overlaps and training understudies about all classes of language

structures, educators will have met the need to upgrade the instruction and learning process so

that it happens easily and effectively.