11

II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This chapter deals with two major points: review of previous research and review

of related literature.

2.1. Review of Previous Research

Many researchers have conducted studies about morphological analysis and reading

comprehension. The outcomes are presented as follows.

The first study that revealed the positive effect of morphological analysis on

reading comprehension was done done by Ku and Anderson (2003). They

conducted a study to investigate whether morphological awareness, which is

conscious awareness of the morphemic structure of words and the ability to reflect

on and manipulate that structure, played a significant role in vocabulary

acquisition and reading proficiency among second, fourth, and sixth American

and Chinese graders of English and Chinese languages. The researchers

administered a reading comprehension test along with a morpheme recognition

test, a morpheme interpretation test, and a pseudoword judgment test. The results

demonstrated that morphological awareness was developed gradually throughout

the students’ language experience and that morphological awareness was

indispensable for English and Chinese vocabulary acquisition and reading

proficiency.
 11

The second study about morphological analysis and reading comprehension was

done by Timyam (2008). He conducted needs analysis of knowledge in linguistics

for English-major students. The subjects were 123 English-major students at the

undergraduate and graduate levels in Thailand. The results revealed that the

students considered morphology as significantly needed. That study suggested

that morphological elements should be taught in order to help students know the

meaning of unfamiliar words.

The third study about morphological analysis and reading ability was done by

Kirby (2011). He investigated the effect of morphological awareness on reading in

103 children from grades 1 to 3. Morphological awareness was assessed with a

word analogy task that included a wide range of morphological transformations.

The results indicated that morphological awareness was a significant predictor of

word reading accuracy and speed, pseudoword reading accuracy, text reading

speed, and reading comprehension. Morphological awareness also explained

variance in reading comprehension after further controlling word reading. He

concluded that morphological awareness had important roles in word reading and

reading comprehension and he suggested that it should be included more

frequently in assessment and instruction.

The fourth study was done by Asgharzade (2012). That study investigated the

effect of explicit morphological practice on improving reading comprehension

ability of Iranian intermediate level language learners. The participants in that

study were sixty Iranian EFL learners in English institutes of Amol, Mazandaran,

Iran that were randomly assigned to one experimental group and one control

group.
 12

First of all, the students in both groups took pretest. Then, the treatments of the

researcher started and all the students in both groups received a six-sessions

reading comprehension training but the experimental group also received explicit

morphological practice during reading comprehension classes. After finishing the

treatments, all the participants took a posttest.

The results indicated that the students in the experimental group showed a

progress in their reading comprehension ability from pretest to posttest. That

demonstrated that explicit morphological practice was effective in improving

reading comprehension skills of Iranian intermediate level EFL students.

The last study was done by Varatharajoo (2013). The aim of his study was to

investigate morphemic analysis awareness among low proficiency Malaysian

secondary school students in ESL context. Learners’ morphemic analysis

awareness in this study was assessed based on analytic and synthetic aspects of

morphemic analysis tasks. The results indicated that the students had limited

awareness in both analytic and synthetic aspects of morphemic analysis tasks.

This finding implicated that there was a need for explicit teaching of morphology

units to create morphemic analysis awareness among Malaysian secondary school

students. That was because it could help them to unlock the meaning of new and

complex words by analyzing the meaningful parts within the words.

Based on the previous studies elaborated above, the following things had been

found:

1. Morphological awareness was developed gradually throughout the students’

language experience and that morphological awareness was indispensable for

 13

English and Chinese vocabulary acquisition and reading proficiency (Ku and

Anderson, 2003).

2. The students at the undergraduate and graduate levels in Thailand considered

morphology as significantly needed in order to help students know the meaning

of unfamiliar words (Timyam, 2008).

3. Morphological awareness was a significant predictor of word reading accuracy

and speed, pseudoword reading accuracy, text reading speed, and reading

comprehension. It has important roles in word reading and reading

comprehension, and it is suggested that it should be included more frequently

in assessment and instruction (Kirby, 2011).

4. The Iranian intermediate level EFL students in the experimental group showed

a progress in their reading comprehension ability from the pretest to the

posttest after explicit morphological instruction. That demonstrated explicit

morphological practice was effective in improving reading comprehension

skills of Iranian intermediate level EFL students (Asgharzade, 2012).

5. The students of Malaysian secondary school had limited awareness in both

analytic and synthetic aspects of morphemic analysis tasks. There was a need

for explicit teaching of morphology units to create morphemic analysis

awareness because it could help them to unlock the meaning of new and

complex words by analyzing the meaningful parts within the words.

(Varatharajoo, 2013).

Based on the findings above, there was one issue that needed an attention, that is,

morphological analysis had played a significant role in reading comprehension.

The results of the findings recommended that there should be an instruction of

 14

morphological analysis because it can help them to unlock the meaning of new

and complex words. Therefore, this research would be carried out to deal with that

issue.

2.2. Review of Related Literature

This part consists of some terms reviewing the explanation of literature that

relates to this research. The explanations are as follows:

2.2.1. Concept of Reading Comprehension

It is better to know what reading is before going to the concept of reading

comprehension. Reading is one of language skills in learning English that deals

with written form. For many years, there has been three basic definitions of

reading (Foertsch, 1998). According to the first definition, learning to read means

learning to pronounce words. The second definition states that learning to read

means learning to identify words and get their meaning. For the third definition,

learning to read means learning to bring meaning to a text in order to get meaning

from it.

Reading is more than knowing what a letter of alphabet stands for. Reading

involves more than recognition, that is, without comprehension, no reading takes

place. Therefore, reading comprehension can be understood as the ability to make

sense of written or printed symbols to guide recovery of information to construct

plausible interpretation of the written message (Grabe et. al., 1986: 27). As it has

been discussed in the first chapter, reading is essential because most of beneficial

information in the world are in a written form. Therefore, those who want to know
 15

and improve every information and knowledge have to read. Moreover, the U.S.

National Reading Panel (Armbruster, Bonnie B., and Jean Osborn, 2001) defines

reading comprehension as a complex system of deriving meaning from prints that

requires all of the following:

1. The skill and knowledge to understand how phonemes or speech sound are

connected to print.

2. The ability to decode unfamiliar words.

3. The ability to read fluently.

4. Sufficient background information and vocabulary to foster reading

comprehension.

5. The development of appropriate active strategies to construct meaning from

print.

6. The development and maintenance of a motivation to read.

In addition, Simanjuntak (1988: 4) states that the first point to be made about

reading process is comprehension and the meaning is the basic element for

comprehension. She also adds that comprehending a text is an interactive process

between the readers’ background knowledge and the text itself. It is also

supported by Eskey (1986) saying that schemata plays a major role in reading

comprehension. It is important that the readers should be able to interpret what

they read and associate with their experience because when they read the text, the

communication process between the readers and the writer has happened. The

readers try to interact with print and their prior knowledge is combined with the

visual (written) information. As a result, they may be able to comprehend the text.
 16

Thus, there is no reading without comprehension and background knowledge

(schemata) is involved in the process of building up the comprehension.

Generally, there has been five sort reading skills that should be mastered by the

readers to comprehend the text deeply. They are identifying main idea,

identifying details, determining inference, understanding vocabulary, and

reference (Nuttall, 1985). Among them, there are two basic reading skills that

have to master as follows.

1. Identifying main idea

In accordance with Segretto (2002: 12), main idea is what the passage is

mostly about. The author often states the main idea in the first or last few

sentences of the first paragraph. However, the author may state the main idea

anywhere in the passage. Sometimes, the author only suggests the main idea

by leaving clues within the passage.

2. Understanding vocabulary

Linan et al (2007: 87) states that the role of vocabulary in reading is clearly

understood: vocabulary knowledge, the understanding of word meanings and

their use, contributes to reading comprehension and knowledge building.

In addition to those things, there are still many skills the readers should develop.

This is because reading comprehension test items will vary and do not cover those

five reading skills only. Therefore, the readers can develop their reading skills by

using the following reading comprehension strategies (Suparman, 2012).

1. Making/confirming/revising predictions

Predicting is guessing what things are about to happen using a few facts. The
 17

readers are asked to always reread and ask themselves questions until they

have enough information to predict an outcome.

2. Interpreting problems/solutions

Problem and solution is a pattern of organization where information in a

passage is expressed as a dilemma or concerning issue (a problem) and

something that can be or should be done to remedy this issue (solution or

attempted solution).

3. Making a generalization

A generalization is a simplification of a large topic. The readers should think

carefully what one true thing is they can say about all the information. To be

valid, a generalization must be true for all things and in all cases.

From the previous statements, it is clear that reading and comprehension is

regarded as one activity which can not be separated and depends on the progress

of activity of mind. In other words, reading comprehension is an activity to grasp

the meaning of written materials with fully understanding and the information

from the readers’ own background knowledge to build up comprehension.

2.2.2. Concept of Teaching Reading

Teaching reading in learning English turns to be salient because all aspects in

learning English requires this ability to get familiar with English vocabularies as

the basic component in learning this subject. McDonough and Shaw (1993) state

that the aim of teaching reading is to develop the students’ skill so that they can

read English texts effectively and efficiently. To be able to do so, students have to

be familiar first to the words on the text so that they can comprehend the text and
 18

understand the information effectively. This simultaneously assumes that teaching

reading can not be separated from teaching vocabulary.

Reading comprehension and vocabulary are inextricably linked. The ability to

decode or identify and pronounce words is self-evidently important, but knowing

what the words mean has a major and direct effect on knowing what any specific

passage means. Students with a smaller vocabulary than other students

comprehend less of what they read and it has been suggested that the most

impactful way to improve comprehension is to improve vocabulary. In order to

develop the needed vocabulary knowledge, learners should be exposed to various

extensive readings, be taught individual words explicitly, and taught strategies to

unlock word meaning, and have their word consciousness raised (Graves, 2004).

Alyousef (2005: 143) states that in teaching reading, contemporary reading task

involves three-phase procedures: pre-, while-, and post-reading stages. The pre-

reading stage helps to activate the relevant schema. Then the aim of while-reading

stage is to develop the students’ ability in tackling texts by developing their

linguistic and schematic knowledge. Post-reading includes activities which

enhance learning comprehension using matching exercise, cloze exercise, cut-up

sentences, and comprehension questions.

In teaching reading, the teacher should provide strategy to the students with

purpose for reading to anticipate different type of reading texts. As Suparman

(2012) states that there are two major reasons for reading (1) reading for pleasure;

(2) reading for information (in order to find out something or in order to do

something with the information readers get).

 19

In brief, teaching reading truly cannot be separated from teaching vocabulary.

This is because words are the components in reading text that readers should

understand the meaning of the words so that they can comprehend such a reading

text. It is assumed that as reader’s vocabulary mastery is better, their reading

comprehension also turns better. It also can be stated that in teaching reading,

appropriate and possible strategy should be applied based on the purpose of

reading in order to get the comprehension.

2.2.3. Concept of Hortatory Exposition Text

In teaching to increase morphological knowledge, the texts used should be

considered. Expository texts provide exposure to a wider variety of members of

morphological families than another type of text, such as narrative text (Kirby and

Bowers, 2012). Thus, an increased attention to expository texts may facilitate the

development of morphological and vocabulary knowledge. For that reason,

hortatory exposition text as one of the examples of expository texts was chosen in

this research.

Hortatory exposition text is a kind of text that elaborates the writer‘s idea about

the surrounding phenomenon. It is also a kind of text that presents one side of an

issue in a form of arguments. Its purpose is to argue/persuade the reader that

something should be or should not be done or supported. To make the persuasion

stronger, the speakers or writers give recommendation of what should be or

should not be done. That text consists of the following generic structures:

1. Thesis : It introduces the topic and indicates the writer’s position.

2. Argument : It explains the arguments to support the writer’s position.

 20

3. Recommendation : It persuades the the reader that something should be or

should not be done or supported.

The example of hortatory exposition text is as follows.

Table 2.1 Hortatory Exposition Text

Generic Structure Hortatory Exposition Text

Organic food is really beneficial, especially for its consumers, and for
Thesis
several reasons, organic food is advisable to consume.
The nutritional value of food is largely a function of its vitamin and
mineral content. In this regard, organically grown food is dramatically
superior in mineral content to that grown by modern conventional methods.
Healthy plants mean healthy people and better nourished plants provide better
nourishment to people.
A major benefit to consumers of organic food is that it is free of
contamination with health harming chemicals such as pesticides, fungicides,
and herbicides. As you would expect of populations fed on chemically grown
food, there has been a profound upward trend in the incidence of diseases
Arguments
associated with exposure to toxic chemicals in industrialized societies.
It comes as no surprise, therefore, that organically grown food tastes
better than that conventionally grown. The tastiness of fruit and vegetables is
directly related to its sugar content, which in turn is a function of the quality
of nutrition that the plant itself has enjoyed.
Organically grown plants are nourished naturally, rendering the
structural and metabolic integrity of their cellular structure superior to those
conventionally grown. As a result, organically grown food can be stored
longer and do not show the latter’s suspectibility to rapid mold and rotting.
Considering the advantages mentioned above, we have to consume
Recommendation
organic food because it is really beneficial.
Adapted from <[Link]

To sum up, hortatory exposition text belongs to a text persuading the readers to do

or not to do something. It consists of thesis, arguments, and recommendation.

2.2.4. Concept of Morphological Analysis

Morphological analysis derives from morphology. Morphology is the study of the

forms of words and the ways in which words are related to other words of the

same language (Anderson, 1992). Morphological analysis is the process of

breaking down morphologically complex words into their constituent morphemes

(word meaning parts). A morpheme is often defined as the smallest unit of

 21

meaning in a word. It may consist of a word, such as hand, or a meaningful piece

of a word, such as the –ed of looked, that cannot be divided into smaller

meaningful parts. According to Oiry (2009), morphemes can be classified based

on various properties like where they show up in words. All morphemes are either

free or bound. Simply, free morphemes are those that can exist in their own (e.g.

book in notebooks), whereas bound morphemes cannot (e.g. –s in notebooks)

(Coates, 1999).

Bound morpheme is also further divided into two categories. They are inflectional

and derivational morpheme. The inflectional morpheme is a word ending that

changes grammatical roles but still in the same part of speech. It serves a purely

grammatical function, never creates a new word but only a different form of the

same word.

Table 2.2 Inflectional Categories

Word class to which Regular affix used to

Inflectional category
inflection applies express category
Nouns Number -s, -es: book/books,
bush/bushes

Possessive -'s, -': the cat's tail, Charles'

toe
Verbs 3rd person singular present -s, -es: it rains, Karen writes,
the water sloshes
past tense -ed: paint/painted

perfect aspect -ed: paint/painted ('has

painted), (past participle)

progressive or -ing: fall/falling,

continuous aspect write/writing,
(present participle)
Adjectives

Comparatives er: tall/taller

(comparing two
items)

Superlatives est: tall/tallest

Adapted from Oiry (2009)
 22

On the other hand, a derivational morpheme is a type of bound morpheme which

generates new words by changing the class of the word or forming new words.

For instance, entertain (verb) becomes entertainment (noun), danger (noun)

becomes dangerous (adjective), diligent (adjective) becomes diligently (adverb),

and many more.

According to Oiry (2009), there are three word formation processes in English;

inflection, derivation, and compound words. Inflection is the process by which

affixes are combined with roots to indicate basic grammatical categories, such as

tense or plurality (e.g. in 'cat-s', 'talk-ed', '-s' and '-ed' are inflectional suffixes). It

is viewed as the process of adding very general meanings to existing words, not as

the creation of new words. On the other hand, derivation is the process by which

affixes are combined with roots to create new words (e.g. in 'modern-ize', 'read-

er', '-ize' and '-er' are derivational suffixes). It is viewed as using existing words to

make new words. In addition to inflection and derivation, compound word is a

word that is formed from two or more simple or complex words. Thus,

compounding is a process whereby two or more individual words are combined to

form a new word with a new meaning. Here are a few examples: credit card,

video games, underground, and underwater.

It can be stated that inflection and derivation consist of the combination of free

morpheme and bound morpheme while compound word is the combination of free

morpheme and free morpheme. Those formation of words are the origin to

analyze words through morphological analysis. The first way to analyze words

through morphological analysis is by analyzing compound words (free morpheme

 23

+ free morpheme). Each free morpheme has its own meaning and to determine the

meaning of that word, the reader just needs to combine the meaning of every free

morpheme.

The other way of morphological analysis is by analyzing free morpheme + bound

morpheme. Nation (1990) states that morphological analysis involves deriving the

meaning of a word by combining the meaning of the parts of the word

(morphemes). The word parts with meaning include (a) prefixes, (b) suffixes, and

(c) roots. The root is the core of a word to which other morphological units are

attached. The difference between root and stem is that a stem is a base morpheme

to which another morphological piece is attached. For example, disagree is the

stem of disagreement because it is the base to which –ment attaches, but agree is

the root.

Then, prefixes and suffixes belong to the term affixes. Prefixes (e.g. re-, un-) are

bound morphemes that are attached in front of a stem, while suffixes (e.g. -s,

-able) are bound morphemes that are attached at the end of a stem. Table 2.3

below displays the most common prefixes and suffixes adapted from Blevins

(2001).

Table 2.3 Most Common Prefixes and Suffixes in Order of Frequency

Prefixes
Highest frequency High frequency Medium frequency
un- (not, opposite of) over- (too much) trans- (across)
re- (again) mis- (wrongly) semi- (half)
dis- (not, opposite of) pre- (before) anti- (against)
non- (not) inter- (between, among) mid- (middle)

Suffixes
Highest frequency High frequency Medium frequency
-s (plural) -er, -or (person) -ness (state of)
-ed (past tense) -ion, -tion (act, process) -ity, -ty (state of)
-ing (progressive tense) -ible, -able (can be done) -ment (action or process)
Adapted from Blevins (2001)
 24

According to Nation (1990), morphological analysis involves three skills: (a)

breaking a new word into its morphological parts, (b) connecting a meaning to

each of those parts, and (c) combining the meaning of the parts to determine the

word’s definition. For instance, the word worker is comprised of two meaning

units, the base work, and the suffix –er, which conveys the meaning of an agent

(person or thing) that does whatever is implied in the base. Thus, the worker is

one who works.

There are two approaches of morphological analysis (Arnoff and Fudeman, 2005).

Those approaches reflect two dimensions of learners’ morphological knowledge

of word formation. The analytic approach is concerned with morpheme

identification or breaking words down into its meaningful components. For

example, notebooks can be recognized as note-book-s. The other example is

childhoods: child: little human being, -hood: the state of being, -s: to indicate

plural. The synthetic approach, on the other hand, is concerned with productivity

of morphological structure or bringing the smallest pieces (morphemes) together

to form words. It is assumed that learners know what the pieces are in order to be

able to construct new meaning into words. For instance, Ahmed lived longer than

Ali. Ahmed outlived Ali.

According to Farsi (2008), 60% of the unfamiliar words a reader encounters in a

text have meanings that can be predicted on the basis of their component parts. In

additon, having an awareness of morphological structure and the ability to break

down morphologically complex words into their constituent parts may help

readers assign meaning to new words they encounter in text (Anglin, Miller and
 25

Wakefield, 1993; Carlisle, 1995). As a result, a reader with a better grasp of word

formation processes may be better to infer the meanings of these words and will

therefore be able to comprehend the text better (Nagy, Berninger, Abbott, and

Vaughan, 2003). Therefore, morphological analysis turns to be possible and

potential way to help readers to understand reading text and as a result teaching

this kind of analysis is recommended.

According to Kieffer and Lesaux (2007), to break a word down into morphemes, a

student must complete the following four steps:

1. Recognize that he or she does not know the word or does not have a deep

understanding of the meaning of the word.

2. Analyze the word for morphemes she or he recognizes (roots and affixes).

3. Hypothesize a meaning for the word based on the word parts.

4. Check the hypothesis based on the context.

Kieffer and Lesaux (2007) also state to complete those steps, there are three types

of language knowledge that students need to know to use morphological analysis

effectively:

1. Knowledge of Prefixes and Suffixes

Teachers can teach prefixes and suffixes in a variety of ways. Teachers should

engage students in grouping words by prefix or suffix. They can then discuss

what these words share in meaning or part of speech. In this way, students can

articulate their own meanings of prefixes and suffixes. Providing a cumulative

word wall with these prefixes and suffixes grouped by meaning will reinforce

these lessons. Teachers can also develop students’ word consciousness by

 26

encouraging them to seek out and analyze new examples of word parts to add

to the wall. Like other vocabulary items, learning prefixes and suffixes will

require practice and reinforcement.

2. Knowledge of Roots

Students’ abilities to extract roots from derived words can be a powerful

strategy for acquiring new vocabulary. However, like other vocabulary words,

these roots should not be presented as a list to be memorized, but rather they

should be taught in meaningful contexts when they are most useful for students

to comprehend particular texts.

3. Knowledge of How Words Get Transformed

Teachers can group words by root to show how a single word can take many

forms. This can expand students’ written vocabulary by providing them with

several forms for a known word.

Table 2.4 How Words Get Transformed

Noun Adjective Verb Adverb

politics, politician political politically
representation representative represent
finance financial financially
acceptance (un)acceptable accept (un)accepatably
Adapted from Blevins (2001)

In brief, morphological analysis is the practice of disassembling complex words

into meaningful parts ([Link] = child + -hood + -s), learning the meanings

of roots, affixes (child= baby, -hood= the state of being, -s= to indicate plural

nouns), and reassembling the meaningful parts into new meanings (motherhood,

fatherhood, brotherhood).
 27

2.2.5. Morphological Analysis in Reading Comprehension

Reading comprehension is a complex undertaking that involves many levels of

processing. One of the most fundamental aspects of comprehension is the ability to

deal with unfamiliar words encountered in text. Those unfamiliar words relate to

one’s vocabulary knowledge. Vocabulary and reading comprehension have a

reciprocal relationship, that is, as greater vocabulary leads to greater

comprehension, better comprehension also leads to learn more vocabulary words

(McBride-Chang, 2005).

Stahl (1999) suggests that knowing a word means not only knowing its literal

definition but also knowing its relationship to other words, its connotations in

different contexts, and its power of transformation into various other forms.

Students who can master these different aspects of knowing a word have strong

depth of vocabulary knowledge, and students who are familiar with many words

have breadth of vocabulary knowledge. Absolutely that rich of vocabulary

knowledge will result in their better understanding of a passage.

A large number of the unfamiliar words that students encounter in printed school

English textbook can be understandable if students know the more common root

word and can break the complex word down (Farsi, 2008). Since texts contain

many of these complex but decipherable words, students’ abilities to attack and

dissect them are essential to their understanding of those texts. Therefore,

morphological analysis, which is the ability to disassemble morphologically

complex words into their meaningful parts and to derive meanings of the whole

words from their morphemes, is a potential learning strategy that seems

 28

particularly useful for the learners when attempting to tackle the meanings of new

words.

According to McBride-Chang (2005), the larger the student's reading vocabulary,

the better his or her comprehension, and the more one comprehends, the more one

can learn new words. Kuo and Anderson (2006) also state that learners who are

provided with morphological knowledge including the knowledge of how words

are formed, by combining prefixes, suffixes, and roots have larger vocabulary

repertoire and better reading comprehension. In addition, a reader with a better

grasp of word formation processes will be better to infer the meanings of these

words and will therefore be able to comprehend the text better (Nagy, Berninger,

Abbott, and Vaughan, 2003).

A number of studies have investigated the relationship between morphological

awareness as a threshold of morphological analysis and reading comprehension in

general and vocabulary knowledge in particular. Deacon and Kirby (2004)

conducted four-year longitudinal study and the result indicated that there was a

positive relationship between morphological awareness and reading

comprehension for the second, forth, and sixth graders. The study indicated that

morphological awareness contributed to reading development even after three

years of the study and after controlling for phonological awareness.

Furthermore, Ku and Anderson (2003) conducted a study to investigate whether

morphological awareness played a significant role in vocabulary acquisition and

reading proficiency among second, fourth, and sixth American and Chinese

graders of English and Chinese languages. The results demonstrated that

 29

morphological awareness was developed gradually throughout the students’

language experience and that morphological awareness was indispensable for

English and Chinese vocabulary acquisition and reading proficiency.

Those explanations and previous researches above concerning with morphological

analysis in reading comprehension show this kind of analysis may turn to be

fruitful as one of the strategies to uncover the meaning of new words for

promoting learners’ vocabulary knowledge and reading abilities. When the

readers have the ability to break down the word parts into its base, they

simultaneously have a chance to infer the meaning of the words and will be able

to comprehend the text better.

2.2.6. Procedure of Teaching Reading through Morphological Analysis

In doing this research, the researcher gives treatments to the students by teaching

reading comprehension of hortatory exposition text through morphological

analysis teaching. The teaching procedures are adapted from Kieffer and Lesaux

(2007). The procedures have been modified by the researcher into the following

steps:

1. Pre Activity

a. The students’ schemata are activated by the teacher who asks affixes the

students have learned in Bahasa.

b. The students are shown a video relating to some transformations of the

same word forms containing affixes in English.

c. Each student gets the reading text.

 30

d. The students are directed to the topic under discussion by being asked

some questions relating to the topic of the reading text presented.

2. While activitiy

a. The students read the text given by the teacher.

b. The students together with the teacher discuss the main idea of that text.

c. The students observes some words consisting of prefixes and suffixes

from that text.

d. The students together with the teacher analyze those morphologically

complex words consisting of prefixes and suffixes to find their meanings

in a process of morphological analysis.

e. In pair, the students are asked to find out and break down the other words

consisting of prefixes and suffixes from that text so that they are able to

define their meanings. Later they will discuss it guided by the teacher.

f. The students observe some roots from that text. The students together

with the teacher add some prefixes and suffixes to those roots to show

that a word can be tranformed into another word with both prefixes and

suffixes and still with the same related meaning.

g. The students are asked to analyze the other words.

h. The students are informed that morphological analysis may not only

consist of prefix and suffix but also consist of free morpheme and free

morpheme (compund words).

i. The students, as well as, the teacher discuss that reading text as a whole.
 31

j. The students do the task following that reading comprehension text and

discuss it by peer-to-peer correction.

3. Post Activity

a. The students together with the teacher summarize the day’s material.

b. The students take part in the follow-up acitivities. They have to find out 5

morphologically complex words and break them down into roots,

prefixes, and suffixes and transform other 5 roots into other words

consisting of prefixes and suffixes from another hortatory exposition text

provided by the teacher.

2.2.7. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Morphological Analysis

As a strategy in tackling the meaning of morphologically complex words

encountered in a text, the researcher assumes that morphological analysis comes

in both its strength and weakness. Those strength and weakness are considered

from some previous studies done by Ku and Anderson (2003) and Varatharajoo

(2013). Here are the advantages and disadvantages or morphological analysis:

1. The advantages of morphological analysis

By breaking down morphologically complex words into their meaningful

parts and deriving meanings of the whole words from their morphemes

known as morphological analysis, the students will get advantages when

encountering unfamiliar words in reading text. The first point is it can

improve their vocabulary knowledge. Simultaneously, when their vocabulary

mastery has improved, their reading comprehension goes better as well. This
 32

two things result in their independency as a reader who can predict the

meaning of the words and comprehend the text better.

2. The disadvantages of morphological analysis

It seems that morphological analysis is an effective strategy for helping

students’ reading comprehension. However, it has several weaknesess as

well. There are two weaknesess when performing morphological analysis in

the class. First, morphological analysis needs longer time because there are

many components of prefixes and suffixes that can be attched to the stem of

the word with different form and meaning to be introduced to the students.

Second, it is quite difficult to introduce and teach this kind of analysis to the

students who do not know the meaning of many common base forms.

To overcome the first disadvantage above, the researcher tried to select the most

common and frequent prefixes and suffixes usually used in hortatory exposition

text for the second grade of senior high school students. That was done because

not all components of suffixes and prefixes were used in hortatory exposition text

and the available time for reading comprehension activity was limited. Moreover,

to overcome the second disadvantage, the researcher would frequently introduce

the meaning of base forms found in a reading text so that they would know the

meaning of many common base forms.

2.2.8. Theoretical Assumption

The literature reviews above had made the researcher predict that there would be a

significant difference on both the students’ morphological analysis achievement

and reading comprehension achievement before and after being taught through
 33

morphological analysis teaching and at the end teaching morphological analysis

would have a positive effect on increasing the students’ reading comprehension

achievement. That was because morphological analysis enabled them to break

down words parts to find the meaning of each part especially its base. When they

had known the meaning of its base, they could predict the meaning of the word

which shared the same base form. Then they just continued to find the meaning of

prefix or suffix that was attached to its base form. They could also predict the

meaning of a particular word by finding the other words that they had known,

which shared the same base form, because the word with the mutual base form

had a related meaning. When the meaning of the words could be understood, they

were also able to comprehend a reading text better. Therefore, it could be assumed

that the students’ reading comprehension achievement could increase as the result

of teaching morphological analysis.

2.2.9. Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were proposed in order to answer the mentioned

research questions. For the first research question, the hypothesis was:

There was a significant difference on the students’ morphological analysis

achievement before and after being taught through morphological analysis

teaching.

For the second research question, the hypothesis was:

There was a significant difference on the students’ reading comprehension

achievement before and after being taught through morphological analysis

teaching.
 34

In accordance with the hypothesis of the first and second research question, the

hypothesis for the third research question was:

There was a positive effect of teaching morphological analysis on the students’

reading comprehension achievement.

Concerning with the fourth research question stated in the first chapter, there was

no hypothesis because it refered to a qualitative study.

That is the theoretical background of this research. Then, the next chapter will

discuss the methods of this research.