LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching

1

Authors: Herdiansari Hayuningrum and Made Frida Yulia

Paraphrase is one of the techniques of incorporating sources in which every writer is allowed to borrow the author’s ideas and restate them into their own words. Based on the previous study, it was found that English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) students, Sanata Dharma University, were unable to paraphrase properly since they tended to copy the author’s words directly. If this problem was continuously ignored, it would be dangerous for the students because they could be charged with inadvertent plagiarism. This study was intended to investigate ELESP students’ problems in writing paraphrases and the reasons why they produce unacceptable paraphrases by conducting document analysis and interview in Research Paper Writing class. From the findings, it could be identified that the most frequent type of problem encountered by the students was word-for-word plagiarism.

3

Authors: Markus Budiraharjo

Educational scholars generally agree that educational policies are inevitably regarded as one of the most contested areas in education. On the one hand, democracy requires more involvement on the part of the citizens. At the most ideal level, democratic mechanisms have been developed to allow more people to more fruitfully participate in decision making. It follows that the political mechanisms would entail better policies, which represent the voices of any people. On the other hand, politics seems to run against this ideal. Policy making is highly convoluted with economy and political trade-offs. Drawing on debates over the phonic vs. whole-language policies in the U.S. in the past four or five decades, this paper sets to discuss the complexity of politics and language policy. A growing awareness of the complexity of politics and policy making is certainly a pressing need for those working in the area of English Education.

5

Authors: Barli Bram

This paper explores models of English morphology, namely Item and Arrangement (IA), Item and Process (IP), and Word and Paradigm (WP), which can be used to analyze morphological data, particularly word formation involving prefixes and suffixes. Sample data, consisting of complex words or words having more than one morpheme, were analyzed using the three models to discover their strengths and shortcomings. In order to find out the differences between the three models of morphology, it is important that the current writer should examine strategies for distinguishing between derivational affixes and inflectional ones. There exist three advantages if morphologists know very well the three models of English morphology. First is that IA fails to display a clear sequence of the item and arrangement when dealing with some irregular plural nouns and irregular past tense. Second is that IP offers a better solution to irregular plural nouns, such as mice and men. Third is that WP appears to be the most efficient model when dealing with inflectional morphology.