Abstract

This paper aimed to identify and analyze errors in the direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences committed by Punjabi adult English language learners. For this purpose, 256 students of intermediate level were selected randomly from four tehsils of district Sialkot. The study based on Ellis' theoretical model followed the quantitative research method. The data was collected from both sexes, boys and girls, using convenient and simple random sampling techniques through written tests. The results reveal eight types of errors committed, primarily in Pronouns, Tenses, Imperative Verbs, and Infinitive To. The frequency analysis of the errors showed that the erroneous use of Pronouns was the most frequent, and the least number of errors were made in the use of the modal "Should". There were more errors of 'Omission' and 'Addition' than 'Mis-ordering'. It was also found that the highest number of errors were made in 'Alternating Forms'. 

Key Words

Errors Analysis, Narration, Imperatives, Interlingual Errors, Intralingual Errors

Introduction

As an international language, English has become mandatory for all to learn and speak worldwide. It is the language of technology and scientific advances (Haryanto, 2007). In Pakistan, English is learnt and taught as a foreign and target language. The learners usually commit errors while learning and speaking English. 

 English contains specific rules and regulations for meaningful conversation or communication, like other languages. Grammar is an essential part of these rules and regulations. Grammar is "The set of rules that determine how a language's sentences are constructed" (Thornbury, 2000, p. 1). 

Direct and Indirect narration, as the vital structure of English grammar, may make our conversation more comprehensive; however, the rules of this structure pose a great deal of difficulty in the learning process for English language learners. Dzikraria (2014) states that students struggle to learn the grammatical rules of direct and indirect methods, especially in reported speech.

Objectives

This study contains the following objectives:

? To analyze errors made by Punjabi adult English language learners in constructing direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences.




Research Question

? What kind of errors do Punjabi adult English language learners make in imperative sentences' direct and indirect narration?




Hypothesis

? If Punjabi adult English language learners commit errors in imperative sentences' direct and indirect narration, it is mainly due to L1 interference. 




Imperative Sentences

Imperative sentences are used to give commands, orders, suggestions, requests and pieces of Advice. Moreover, imperative sentences contain an act of forbidding something. These sentences are used without a subject, starting with the first form of the verbs. There are the following types of imperative sentences:

Shut the door. (Command)

Please! give me one rupee. (Request)

Work hard if you want to reach your goal. (A piece of Advice)

Father! Let me go to the picnic. (Taking permission)

Let's enjoy the party. (Suggestion)

? While converting direct imperative sentences into indirect, the imperative verb 'Order' or 'Command 'is used, followed by 'To' to remove quotation marks.




Example

He said to his servant, "Bring a cup of tea for me." (Direct)

He ordered his servant to bring a cup of tea for him. (Indirect)

? If there is a request in a sentence, the imperative verb 'Beg' or 'Request' is used in indirect speech.




Example

I said to her, "Lend me five rupees." (Direct)

I requested her to lend me five rupees. (Indirect)

? If there is a piece of Advice in a sentence, the imperative verb 'Advise' is used in indirect speech.




Example

My friend said to me, "Work hard to pass." (Direct) 

My friend advised me to work hard to pass. (Indirect)

In imperative sentences, 'Let' is used for two purposes:

(i) When 'Let' is used for permission, the word 'Said' is changed into 'Requested', and 'To' is used to remove inverted commas. 




Example

She said, "Let me go." (Direct)

She requested to let her go. (Indirect)

(ii) When 'Let' is used for suggestions, 'Said' is converted into 'Suggested or Proposed'; 'That' is used to remove quotation marks, and 'should' is used along with the first form of the verb (V1).




Example

They said, "Let us go out for a picnic." (Direct)

They proposed that they should go out for a picnic. (Indirect)

(iii) If there is an act of forbidding in the sentence, 'forbade' is used in place of 'said' and 'not'.




Example

The teacher said to us, "Do not waste your precious time." (Direct)

The teacher forbade us to waste our precious time. (Indirect)

The present study mainly focuses on the imperatives' direct and indirect narration because it is an important area in English language learning. There has been no such study in Pakistan involving Punjabi English language learners' errors in using imperatives' direct and indirect narration. English is the official language of Pakistan. People learn it as their second language. However, after a formal education of 14 to 16 years, students can still not achieve adequate English language proficiency (Sarfraz, 2011). English language learners commit different grammatical errors, which are significant in that these are essential evidence of learners' learning progress.  

Literature Review

An error can be defined as a 'Systematic Deviation' in the second, target or foreign language learner's language output. It is a consistent deviation resulting from limited knowledge about language in the foreign language learning process. It cannot be self-corrected. Error is caused by a lack of knowledge and shows the level of competence in language performance. David Crystal (2003) defines Error Analysis (EA) as a: "Technique for identifying, classifying and systematically interpreting the unacceptable forms produced by someone learning a foreign language, using any of the principles and procedures provided by linguistics" (p. 165).

On the other hand, a mistake is different from an error. A performance error is a "random guess or slip" in that the learner cannot utilize the known system correctly. The learner knows the system but fails to use it correctly. Unlike error, a mistake can be self-corrected.

Error Analysis is a technique that measures, classifies, and analyzes learners' errors in learning a foreign language or target language. According to Corder (1967), learners' errors are significant in that they provide the researcher with evidence of how language is learned or acquired and what strategies or procedures the learner employs to discover the language.

A learner's native language is crucial in second language learning. The errors caused by the native language are called inter-lingual errors. Inter-lingual errors are also called transfer or interference errors. On the other side, the errors caused by the difficulty of a second language are called intra-lingual errors and are focused on intra-lingual or developmental errors.




Inter-lingual Interference

Inter-lingual errors are caused by interference of the first language while producing a second language. The learners use their linguistic knowledge of the first language while focusing on writing in the second or target language. Many errors the ESL (English as Second Language) learners commit are due to inter-lingual transfer. Bennui (2008) has conducted a study that examines how the first language interferes with Thai university students' paragraph writing. The findings have shown that inter-lingual errors are due to borrowing Thai words, Thai sentence structure, and Thai cultural writing style. Similarly, the results of Dzikraria's research (2014) and those found by Riyawi and Alwiya (2017) have revealed that English language learners commit many errors because of the inter-lingual transfer.




Intra-lingual Interference

Intra-lingual errors refer to the interference of the L2 (Second Language) system while producing L2 writing. The learners do not know the target language very well, and when they find a problem in L2 production, they rely on their incomplete L2 knowledge and commit errors. Bootchuy (2008) investigated three types of errors: inter-lingual, intra-lingual, and developmental. Intra-lingual errors included the overuse of the verb 'to be', the unnecessary use of subjects and objects, the incorrect verbs, the wrong form of a verb after the modal verbs, the omission of auxiliary verbs in passive voice construction and inaccurate use of conjunctions etc.

This study focused on errors made by Punjabi adult English language learners using the direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences in their writing. In the earlier studies, the researchers analyzed different errors in using direct and indirect narration made by students at different levels.




Theoretical Framework

Rod Ellis is a world-renowned leader in the field of Second Language Acquisition. He has served in the field of language teacher education for many years in different countries. In 1995, Ellis presented a model for analyzing English language learners' errors. This model is more feasible and practical than other models. 

The theoretical framework of the present study involves Ellis' model (1996) of EA. This model provides helpful step-by-step guidance and a clear description of the classification of FL learner errors. This model contains the following steps:

? Collection of L2 learner's Sample

? Identification of Errors

? Description of Errors

? Explanation of Errors

Research Methodology

The population of this study was the students

of first-year and second-year ESL learners in the Punjab province of Pakistan. The researcher collected data from the Sialkot district, which consists of four tehsils: Sialkot, Pasrur, Daska and Sambriyal. Two hundred fifty-six students were selected from 16 colleges consisting of these tehsils. Convenient and simple random sampling techniques were used for this study; the students were selected randomly from each class.

The researcher used the quantitative method and exploratory research design. Data were collected through written tests. The written test was divided into two sections:

Section A contained ten direct statements of imperative sentences; the participants had to convert these direct imperative sentences into indirect imperative sentences.

Section B consisted of ten indirect statements of imperative sentences, and the subjects had to transfer them into the direct narration of imperative sentences.

Data were analyzed through the descriptive analysis technique. Following is the formula used:

P = F / N X n X 100 % 

P = Percentage  

F = Frequency  

N = Number of Participants

n=   Number of items

 

Data Description

There are a total of 2315 errors made in the use of 'Pronoun', 286 errors in 'Tense', 1211 errors in 'Imperative Verbs', 1196 errors in 'Infinitive To', 328 errors in the use of 'Forbade', 558 errors in the use of 'Let',  216 errors in the usage of 'Should' and  476 errors in the use of 'Direct Verbs'.




Table 1

Percentage of Different Errors by Punjabi ESL Learners

S. No	Different Errors	Frequency of Errors	Total of Item Numbers	Percentage
1	Pronoun	2315	20	45.3 %
2	Tense	286	20	5.6%
3	Imperative Verbs	1211	20	23.7%
4	Infinitive to	1196	20	23.4%
5	Use of Forbade	328	20	6.4%
6	Use of Let	558	20	10.9%
7	Use of  Should	216	20	4.3%
8	Direct Verbs	476	20	9.3%

 




According to Table 1, Punjabi ESL learners made 45.3% errors in the use of 'Pronoun', 5.6% errors in 'Tense', 23.7% errors in 'Imperative Verbs', 23.4 % errors in 'Infinitive To', 6.4% errors in the use of 'Forbade', 10.9% in the use of 'Let', 4.3% errors in the use of 'Should' and 9.3 % errors in the use of 'Direct Verbs'.

Data Analysis

The research aimed to discover different errors of Punjabi adult English language learners in constructing direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences, reasons behind these errors and possible solutions.

A written English test with twenty items was conducted to collect errors. Part (A) contained ten items (the learners were required to change direct statements of imperative sentences into indirect narration) in this part. Part (B) also consisted of ten items where the learners were required to convert the indirect narration of imperative sentences into the direct narration.

The researcher has classified the errors in the following way:




 

Table 2

Percentage of Different Errors by Govt. Female Students

S. No	Different Errors	Frequency of Errors	Total of Item Numbers	Percentage
1	Pronoun	643	20	50.3%
2	Tense	109	20	8.6%
3	Imperative Verbs	297	20	23.3%
4	Infinitive to	387	20	30.3%
5	Use of Forbade	90	20	7.4%
6	Use of Let	131	20	10.3%
7	Use of Should	61	20	4.8%
8	Direct Verbs	132	20	10.4%

   




Table 2 shows the frequency of errors committed by Govt. female students. There are 50.3 % errors in 'Pronoun', 8.6 % errors in 'Tense', 23.3 % errors in 'Imperative Verbs', 30.3 % errors in 'Infinitive To', 7. 4 % errors in the usage of 'Forbade', 10.3 % errors in the use of 'Let',  4.8 % errors in the usage of 'Should' and 10.4 % errors in 'Direct Verbs'. The highest percentage is in 'Pronoun', and the lowest is in 'Should'.




 

Table 3

Percentage of Different Errors by Private Female Students

S#	Different Errors	Frequency of Errors	Total of Item Numbers	Percentage
1	Pronoun	412	20	32.2%
2	Tense	54	20	4.3%
3	Imperative Verbs	303	20	23.7%
4	Infinitive to	241	20	18.9%
5	Use of Forbade	58	20	4.6%
6	Use of Let	115	20	9.0%
7	Use of Should	51	20	4.0%
8	Direct Verbs	72	20	5.7%

 




This table describes different errors made by Private female students. The errors of Govt. female students differ from those of Private female students. In the Private sector, girls committed 32.2 % errors in 'Pronouns',  4.3 % errors in 'Tense', 23.7 % errors in 'Imperative Verbs', 18. 9 % errors in 'Infinitive To', 4.6 % errors in the use of 'Forbade',  9.0 % errors in the use of 'Let', 4.0 % errors in the use of 'Should' and 5.7 % error in 'Direct  Verbs'.




 

Table 4

Percentage of Different Errors by Govt. Male Students

S#	Different Errors	Frequency of Errors	Total of Item Numbers	Percentage
1	Pronoun	629	20	49.2%
2	Tense	58	20	4.6%
3	Imperative Verbs	292	20	22.9%
4	Infinitive to	275	20	21.5%
5	Use of Forbade	91	20	8.0 %
6	Use of Let	164	20	12.9%
7	Use of Should	48	20	3.8%
8	Direct Verbs	139	20	10.9%

 




Table 4 demonstrates that Govt. male students committed 49.2 % errors in 'Pronoun', 4.6 % errors in 'Tense', 22.9 % errors in 'Imperative Verbs', 21.5 % errors in 'Infinitive To', 8.0 % errors in the use of 'Forbade', 12.9 % errors in the use of 'Let'. They committed 3.8 % errors in 'Should' and 10.9 % in 'Direct   Verbs'. The highest errors are made in the 'Pronoun', and the lowest errors are made in the use of 'Should'.




 

Table 5

Percentage of Different Errors by Private Male Students

S#	Different Errors	Frequency of Errors	Total of Item Numbers	Percentage
1	Pronoun	631	20	49.3%
2	Tense	65	20	5.8%
3	Imperative Verbs	319	20	25.5%
4	Infinitive to	293	20	22.9%
5	Use of Forbade	89	20	7.0 %
6	Use of Let	148	20	11.6%
7	Use of Should	56	20	4.4%
8	Direct Verbs	133	20	10.4%

 




Table 5 highlights the percentage of different errors committed by Private male students. They made 49.3 % errors in 'Pronoun', 5.8 % errors in 'Tense', 25 .5 % errors in 'Imperative Verbs', 22. 9 %  errors in 'Infinitive To', 7.0 % errors in the use of 'Forbade', 11.6 % errors in the use of 'Let', 4.4 % errors in the use of 'Should', and 10.4 % errors in 'Direct Verbs'. The most errors are made in 'Pronoun' and least are in the use of 'Should'.




 

Table 6

Percentage of Different Errors by Punjabi ESL Learners

S#	Different Errors	Frequency of Errors	Total of Item Numbers	Percentage
1	Pronoun	2315	20	45.3 %
2	Tense	286	20	5.6%
3	Imperative Verbs	1211	20	23.7%
4	Infinitive to	1196	20	23.4%
5	Use of Forbade	328	20	6.4%
6	Use of Let	558	20	10.9%
7	Use of  Should	216	20	4.3%
8	Direct Verbs	476	20	9.3%

 




According to this table,  Punjabi ESL learners made 45.3% errors in the use of 'Pronoun', 5.6% errors in 'Tense', 23.7% errors in 'Imperative Verbs', 23.4 % errors in 'Infinitive To', 6.4% errors in the use of 'Forbade', 10.9% in the use of 'Let', 4.3% errors in the use of 'Should' and 9.3 % errors in the use of 'Direct Verbs'.




 

Table 7

Percentage of Different Categories of Errors

S#	Categories of Errors	Total number of Errors	Percentage
1	Omission	327	25.6%
2	Addition	292	22.9%
3	Mis-Ordering	25	2.0 %
4	Alternating form	941	73.6%

      




Table 7 points out the frequency and percentage of errors made by Punjabi adult English language learners. According to this table, the participants made 25.6 % errors in 'Omission', 22. 9 % errors in 'Addition', 2.0 % errors in 'Mis-Ordering' and 73.6 % in 'Alternating Form'. The students committed the most errors in the 'Alternating Form', and they made the least errors in 'Mis-Ordering'.

Inter-lingual Errors

Inter-lingual errors are caused by interference of L1 while producing L2. The learners use their linguistic knowledge of the first language while focusing on writing in the second or target language. Linguistic transfer occurs when language learners find difficulty in producing the target language. They commit errors when they rely on L1 in making L2 utterances. Many errors committed by ESL learners are due to inter-lingual transfer.

The participants made errors caused by inter-lingual interference while conducting written tests containing imperatives' direct and indirect narration. The learners' mother tongue, Punjabi, interfered when they were converting direct narration into indirect and vice versa. For example, '*The king ordered that let the prisoner be set free', the students wrote this statement after converting direct narration into indirect narration, but this was an erroneous sentence; they did not write 'Infinitive To' to remove inverted commas, the correct sentence would be; 'The king ordered to let the prisoner be set free'. They conducted it incorrectly because of the contrasting structure of the Punjabi language and the English language. In the Punjabi language, the word ‘Kay” is used in place of 'Infinitive To' while converting direct speech into indirect speech. In Punjabi, that particular sentence would be like that; 'Badshah na hukam dita k qedi nu azaad kr deo'; the learners mostly used the knowledge of their mother tongue in their test.

In another inter-lingual error, the subjects converted indirect narration into direct narration by using 'That' such as '*She said to her friends that "Let's say the prayer". This is an incorrect sentence; the correct would be; 'She said to her friends, "Let's say the prayer". In the Punjabi language, the sentence would be like "O' ny apny dostan nu kia k, 'Ao nmaz paran chaliye'." The participants followed the structure of their native language.

In light of the above discussion, the hypothesis proved wrong. The learners made errors caused by inter-lingual interference but made a higher number of errors because of intra-lingual interference. They lacked English language competency. While changing direct narration into the indirect narration of imperative sentences, the participants found it difficult to answer correctly because of first language interference. The structure of imperatives' direct and indirect narration of the Punjabi language is slightly different from that of the English language. They did not write 'infinitive to' to remove quotation marks; rather, they used the relative pronoun 'that' to remove and close quotation marks.

 

Intra-lingual Errors

Intra-lingual errors refer to the interference of the L2 system while producing L2 writing. The learners do not know the target language very well, and when they find a problem in L2 production, they rely on their incomplete L2 knowledge and commit errors. The linguists claim that the learners engage in intra-lingual errors due to second language development. According to Richards (1971), intra-lingual errors are divided into four categories:

 

Overgeneralization

Overgeneralization occurs when a learner makes an error when s/he knows another pattern of the same sort in the second language. The students committed errors because of overgeneralization. Overgeneralization caused most grammatical errors in direct and indirect narration: in part (A): The teacher said, "Come to college in time", the students had to change this sentence into indirect narration like that: 'The teacher ordered to come to college in time',  but the students changed it in such a way, '*The teacher ordered that come to college in time', that was an erroneous sentence because 'Infinitive To' was to be used instead of using 'That' which was used to remove quotation marks.

Furthermore, the students also committed errors in another category, such as, He said to me, "Please give me your book" The correct statement was: 'He requested me to give him my book', but the students did it in this way: '*He requested me to give me your book'. The subjects did not use the correct pronouns during direct and indirect narration. The participants committed 69.7 % errors in 'Overgeneralization'.

 

Ignorance of Rule Restriction

When a learner does not know the correct structure of the second language, it is the category of ignorance of rule restriction. Punjabi adult English language learners make many errors because of their ignorance of rule restrictions. They committed 25. 6 % errors in this category. For example, She said to him, "Please ponder upon my request" The participants had to change this into an indirect narration. They answered: '*She request him to ponder upon her request', this was the incorrect answer, the correct answer: 'She requested to ponder upon her request', but the students omitted past participle (ed) in writing 'Imperative Verb', 'request'.

 

Incomplete Application of Rules

A learner may fail to apply a correct structure, although s/he knows that structure; this falls in the incomplete application of rules.

The participants also changed certain sentences mis-orderly while converting direct narration into indirect and indirect narration into direct narration, such as, The teacher said, "Come to college in time", the subject had to convert it into indirect speech. They did it in such a way: '*Come to college in time ordered by the teacher', it is written in a misordering way. The correct statement was: 'The teacher ordered me to come to college on time'. The participants ignored grammatical rules and used passive voice while narrating directly and indirectly. They made 2.0 % errors in this category.

 

False Concept Hypothesis

False concept hypothesized happens when the learner comprehends the wrong patterns of the second language.

False concept hypothesis was another reason for committing errors in direct and indirect narration. The students were confused about using 'Forbade, Let and Should'. For example, she said, "Do not tease me" The correct answer was: "She forbade me to tease her", but the participants answered: '*She requested me not to tease her'. The participants committed 6.4 % errors of the inappropriate use of 'Forbade'.

The students made 10.9 % errors in the usage of 'Let' such as, "I suggested that we should participate in this seminar", and the correct answer: "I said, “Let's participate in this seminar", but the students answered: '*I said, “We should participate in this seminar”. Here, they did not know how to use 'Let' in changing indirect narration into direct narration.

 Moreover, the subjects could not use 'Should' while converting direct speech into indirect speech, such as, 'He said to his friends, "Let's enjoy the party". The correct answer was: 'He proposed to his friends that we should enjoy the party', but the participants changed in this way: '*He suggested to his friends to enjoy the party'. So, there were 4.3% errors committed in the wrong usage of 'Should'.

 

Errors of Omission

"Omission is the absence of one or more words that have to appear in a well-formed construction" (Hikma, 2020, p. 3).

The students omitted the past participle (ed) of 'order'. They missed 'ed' after 'request'. They cut 'ed' after 'order'. They missed the modal verb 'let' after the infinitive to and 's' after the verb 'like'. 'Please' was missing while converting indirect narration into direct. The verb 'be' was not written before 'focused' while making indirect narration to direct. There was no 'Please' written before the verb 'teach' while converting indirect narration into direct. 'Please' was missing before the modal verb 'let'. The modal verb 'let' was not written before the verb 'choose'.

 

Errors of Addition

"Addition is the appearance of an item which must not present in a well-formed construction" (Hikmah, 2020, p. 3).

The learners added 'please' while converting direct narration into indirect narration. Infinitive to' was written after the direct verb 'said' while converting indirect narration into direct. They also made an incorrect statement by adding 'infinitive to' before the modal verb 'let'.

 

Errors of Mis-ordering

Mis-ordering errors are due to the misplacement of an element in a sentence. The learners misplaced necessary parts in a well-formed utterance because of a lack of L2 knowledge.                                      

The students wrote the sentences disorderly by writing the second part at the beginning and the first part at the end. They misplaced by writing possessive case (my) first and objective case of 'He', (him) later.

 

Errors of Alternating Form

As a result of a lack of vocabulary and poor grammatical development, alternating form errors occur in a well-formed utterance (Hendrawaty, 2018).   

The students did not write objective case' him' for 'he' and possessive case 'my' for 'me' while doing direct narration to indirect. They wrote 'you' instead of the Subjective case 'she' while converting direct narration into indirect. The students did not write objective case' him' for 'my father'. They wrote the possessive case 'your' instead of the possessive case 'his' for 'son' when they made direct, indirect narration. The learners did not write objective case 'her' for 'she'. Possessive case 'my' was missing. 'Your' was used instead of 'my' for the objective case' me'. They did not write objective case' me' for master and possessive case 'your' for students while making indirect narration to direct. While converting indirect narration into direct, the learners misplaced 'you' with 'I'. 'You' pointed to the objective case' me' in reporting speech. To point out 'mother' in the reporting speech, the students must have written objective case' me' in the reported speech while converting indirect narration into direct. They did not write the possessive case 'your' for 'her' and the subjective case 'he' for 'father' in direct speech.

In line with the hypothesis, the findings highlighted that Punjabi adult English language learners committed errors because of a lack of linguistic and grammatical competency in L2 and Punjabi language interference. However, Punjabi adult English language learners committed the most errors because of intra-lingual transfer. They made the lowest number of errors because of inter-lingual transfer. They did not have command over the English language. After ten years of formal education at schools, they were still confused about correctly answering. However, their L1, Punjabi language, also interfered while completing L2, English, and writing tasks. This happened when they found it difficult to apply the linguistic structure of English to complete direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences. They relied on their L1 while doing imperatives' direct and indirect narration and committed errors because of contrasting English and Punjabi language structure and lack of L2 knowledge. 

Conclusion

The study intended to find out and analyze the error committed by Punjabi adult English language learners using direct and indirect narration. 

Based on the research findings, it is concluded that Punjabi adult English language learners made different kinds of errors while doing direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences. They made eight kinds of errors: in 'Pronouns', 'Tense', 'Imperative Verbs', 'Infinitive To', use of 'Forbade', 'Let', 'Should' and 'Direct Verbs'. They also committed different categories of errors. The other categories in which the participants committed errors are 'Omission', 'Addition', 'Mis-Ordering' and 'Alternating Form'.

As a whole, adult English language learners made the highest errors in the use of 'Pronoun', after that in 'Imperative Verbs', 'Infinitive To', the use of 'Let', 'Direct Verbs', use of 'Forbade', 'Tense' and they made the lowest errors in the use of 'Should'. The participants committed the highest number of erroneous sentences in 'Alternating Form', 'Omission', 'Addition' and 'Mis-Ordering'.

Recommendations

There are plausible practical implications to overcoming imperatives' direct and indirect narration errors. Punjabi adult English language learners may develop their English competence if provided with English speaking environment and made to practice direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences with their friends, teachers, and siblings. Mere cramming and no practice are futile. Direct and indirect speech is developed by following rules while speaking and writing direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences. The role of teachers is very much important in this regard. They should use innovative techniques and practical ways to teach imperative sentences' direct and indirect narration. English language teachers' competence in the language and the training in using innovative techniques for effective teaching of direct and indirect narration are important to provide learners with effective training. The sole dependence on Grammar Translation Method (GTM) is partially responsible for encouraging teachers to use L1 in constructing English direct and indirect narration, leading to inter-lingual errors. The situation may improve it. Direct and Natural methods should be included the syllabus while teaching direct and indirect narration of imperative sentences. Finally, Policy makers and designers of the English curriculum and syllabus should include some portion of listening, speaking, reading and writing skills as a basic part of the classroom activities and exams.

References

• Bennui, P. (2008). “A Study of L1 Interference in the Writing of Thai EFL Students.” Malaysian Journal of ELT Research 4, no. 4 72-102.
• Bootchuy, T. (2008). An Analysis of Errors in Academic English Writing by a Group of First Year Thai Graduates Majoring in English (Master Thesis in English for Specific Purposes). Bangkok: The Graduate School, Kasetsart University
• Corder, S. P. (1967). “The Significance of Learner's Errors.” International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 5(4), 161-170.
• Dzikraria, D. (2014). An Error Analysis in Learning Direct and Indirect Speech of Imperative Sentences. A Case of Study at SMK Perwira Jakarta.
• Ellis, R. (1996). The study of second Language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 80(1), 102.
• Haryanto, T. (2007). Grammatical Error Analysis in Students Recount Texts. The Case of the Twelfth-Year Students of SMA N1 Salwi in the Academic Year of 2006/2007. A Final Project
• Hikmah, H. (2020). Analysis of Omission and Addition Errors Found in the Students’ English Texts. ELTICS: Journal of English Language Teaching and English Linguistics, 5(1), 12-23.
• Riyawi, M. R., & Alwiyah, D. (2017). AN ANALYSIS ON STUDENTS’ ERRORS IN USING DIRECT AND INDIRECT SPEECH IN SENTENCES AT SIXTH SEMESTER OF STAI HUBBULWATHAN DURI. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 9(2), 33–51.
• Sarfraz, S. (2011). “Error Analysis of the Written English Essays of Pakistani Undergraduate Students: A Case Study." Asian Transactions on Basic & Applied Sciences 1(3), 29-50.