Beyond Errors: Interlanguage System of L2 Learners and Epistemological Beliefs of L2 Teachers

Beyond Errors: Interlanguage System of L2 Learners and Epistemological Beliefs of L2 Teachers

Rushelle C. Fundano, Ana Cristina G. Fortes

Graduate School, Sorsogon State University, Sorsogon City, Philippines

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.906000201

Received: 05 June 2025; Accepted: 07 June 2025; Published: 08 July 2025

ABSTRACT

This study examined the interlanguage system of ten Grade 11 HUMSS students and the epistemological beliefs of 6 English Teachers at Bulan National High School, Bulan, Sorsogon. Using purposive sampling, it employed descriptive content analysis, specifically thematic coding analysis to determine the interlanguage system of the participants. The study aimed to identify grammatical errors of Grade 11 HUMSS students found in their written essays specifically in subject and verb agreement and verb tenses and the epistemological beliefs of students of their respective L2 teachers teaching them reading and writing subjects. Moreover, it also aimed to rule out the interlanguage system (learning strategies) of the Grade-11 HUMSS students while learning the target language which is English.

The findings revealed that the participants made errors in verb tenses (simple past, present, and future) and subject-verb agreement, including errors with auxiliaries, plural markers, and phrases “one of the”, “each”, and “some”. These errors were both interlingual and intralingual. The interlanguage system of the students was categorized as an internal and external system.

The results of the study showed that most of the teachers believed that errors are a part of learning and use them as opportunities to guide and support their students.

The study suggests further studies on interlanguage fostering awareness on interlanguage as learning system of second language learners. Moreover, it is also suggested to consider external factors such as effective teachers’ corrective feedback and utilizing effective teaching strategies for second language learning such as crafting simplified video lessons appropriately addressing their difficulties encountered.

Keywords- subject and verb agreement errors, verb tenses errors, interlanguage system, error analysis, teachers’ epistemological beliefs,

INTRODUCTION

Errors have always been a central concern in language teaching. Errors are the natural, unavoidable outcome of the second language learning process. A common notion and a misconception that committing errors is a manifestation of weakness and failure, especially in terms of second language acquisition. (Butterfield & Metcalfe, 2006) as cited by (Strong and Buyukerol, 2024). It is often regarded as something negative that must be avoided as a natural approach. Behaviorists’ accounts suggest that errors should not be tolerated or accepted (Lahcen & Mahmoud, 2022). Another viewpoint on error analysis was posited by Brown (1980), who described it as a process that entails identifying, evaluating, and classifying deviation from second language rules to uncover the underlying systems used by learners (Catabay, 2023).

Learning a foreign language, particularly English, is challenging due to its intricacies, cultural differences, and diverse learning environments. (Jha, 2024). English is considered one of the hardest languages to learn due to its unique structure and rules. Interlanguage theory suggests that learners build a different system for themselves, going through multiple phases before mastering the language. This process involves creating interlanguage grammar to represent their current understanding of the target language’s rules. (Singh 2017).

Learning to write is a daunting task for native speakers of any language, as it takes an extensive amount of time and practice to write well. For learners of English as an additional language, learning to write in English is even harder and more time-consuming, thus causing errors to take place. Errors in writing, particularly for second-hand and foreign-language learners, are a natural part of language learning. These errors indicate a learner’s level of English proficiency, and even minor grammar mistakes can significantly impact communication. Understanding and addressing these errors, particularly in grammatical errors, is crucial for effective communication.

Errors in language teaching, particularly in writing, can be seen as a learning opportunity or a sign of failure, as per the Philippine Context (2020) Filipino learners struggle with English, despite having English as a second language. The country ranked 27th in the EPI this year, falling seven spots from 20th. Some Senior High School students also struggle with writing English.

Error analysis is a task that identifies mistakes made by second language learners, assessing their proficiency, understanding their learning process, and identifying common challenges during language acquisition. It focuses on both written and spoken language, indicating that students may not yet master the language rules they are learning. (Machon, 2021)

Teachers’ perception of learners’ errors is crucial. They should understand the reasons behind errors and view them positively. Traditional approaches, such as interrupting, pointing out mistakes, and providing extra practice, can make learners feel guilty and defensive. Teachers become frustrated when students repeatedly make errors, leading to a mismatch between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of language errors, their corrective methods, and the correctness of these errors, resulting in frustration for both parties. (Kopfer, 2022).

The study emphasized the importance of language teaching in enhancing students’ awareness of errors, acquiring knowledge, and enhancing communicative and writing skills. It also highlighted the role of second language teachers in understanding learners’ errors and their impact on their learning process.

Furthermore, the study was worthwhile on inlining new knowledge and perspective on looking at errors specifically at interlanguage errors impact such error-making (on the part of the learner) and error-correction (on the part of the teacher). It focused on the area of grammatical writing errors specifically on verb tenses and subject-verb agreement since it is considered as top error committed by a second language learner not just in the Philippines but even among other non-native learners of the English Language.

In the local context, the researcher, also being a second language teacher, personally experienced this dilemma wherein her second language learners struggle in grammar specifically in subject and verb agreement and verb tenses. The students find it difficult to write grammatically correct sentences, this prompted her to conduct the study, to address this concern.

Thus, exploring this study and endeavor significantly aims to shed light on improving second language learning and teaching in terms of interlanguage errors and hope to be an avenue for innovating creative supplementary material in dealing with interlanguage grammatical errors that focused on verb tenses and subject and verb agreement.

Statement Of The Problem

The study examined Grade 11 Senior High School students’ written compositions, focusing on verb tense and subject-verb agreement errors, and the influence of second language teachers’ epistemological beliefs on student errors.

The study sought to answer the following research questions:

1. What are the errors in verb tenses and subject and verb agreement found in the written composition of L2 learners?
2. What interlanguage system can be derived from second language learners’ errors in verb tenses and subject and verb agreement?
3. What are the epistemological beliefs of second language teachers in these errors on tense and agreement?
4. What supplementary material can be designed to help second language teachers in teaching learner’s verb tenses and subject and verb agreement?

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study is qualitative in nature as it is intended to give an in-depth description of the learner’s interlanguage (Bogdan and Biklen, 2007; Cohen et. al., 2017). This study employed the descriptive content analysis method because it dealt with the analysis of errors in the written discourse of the student respondents. Descriptive research design is a purposive process of gathering, analyzing, classifying, and tabulating data about prevailing conditions, practices, processes, trends, and cause-effect relationships and then making adequate and accurate interpretations of such data with or without or sometimes minimal aid of statistical methods (Patten et.al.,2017)

Content analysis is defined as “any technique for making inferences by systematically and objectively identifying special characteristics of messages.” (Holsti, 1968). Content analysis is a research tool used to determine the presence of certain words, themes, or concepts within some given qualitative data (i.e. text).

Using content analysis, researchers can quantify and analyze the presence, meanings, and relationships of certain words, themes, or concepts. Sources of data could be from interviews, open-ended questions, field research notes, conversations, or any occurrence of communicative language (such as books, essays, discussions, newspaper headlines, speeches, media, and historical documents).

To validate the reliability of the data interview was conducted to ascertain the L2 errors in composition writing committed by the Senior High School students. Also, this study used the data triangulation method to ensure the validity and reliability of data. Triangulation refers to the use of multiple methods or data sources in qualitative research to develop a comprehensive understanding of phenomena (Patton, 1999). Triangulation also has been viewed as a qualitative research strategy to test validity through the convergence of information from different sources. Denzin (1978) and Patton (1999) identified four types of triangulations: (a) method triangulation, (b) investigator triangulation, (c) theory triangulation, and (d) data source triangulation. The current study employed method triangulation.

Written essays were collected and analyzed as the main data and were supported by the conduct of interviews with the participants both the student and the teacher participants of this study.

The Participants

The participants of this study were the ten selected Grade 11 Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMMS) Senior High School students and six Senior High School English Teachers of Bulan National High School. The researcher decided to choose the student participants under HUMSS strand since this is the strand that targets to develop writing skill as one of the core skills in communication, among its career paths are journalism, education, law, writing, social sciences and politics. The researcher believed that the student participants already knew the competency needed to write an essay since it has already been covered in their lower years even in their junior high school and elementary years. Grade 11 HUMSS Senior High School students of Bulan National High were offered reading and writing subject that focuses on mastering writing skill with different approaches, thus choosing the HUMSS strand.

The sampling method employed was purposive sampling. Purposive sampling, also known as judgmental, selective, or subjective sampling, is a non-probability sampling technique where researchers intentionally select participants based on specific characteristics relevant to their study (Bullard, 2024). The researcher prepared a criterion in choosing student-participants, they must have a writing subject (reading and writing subject) must know already how to compose a three-part essay.

Included also were the six teacher participants who were also chosen using purposive sampling technique and interviewed face to face since the researcher and the participant were teaching in the same school.

The Instrument

This study used corpus analysis, according to Storjohann (2005), the corpus-based approach is a method that uses an underlying corpus as an inventory of language data. It is a method where the corpus is interrogated, and data is used to confirm linguistic pre-set explanations and assumptions. This involved the analysis of essay writings of 10 selected Senior High School Students to ascertain the interlanguage errors they have committed.

Another research tool that is employed in this study is interview guide. Kajornboon (2005) said, that interviews are a systematic way of talking and listening to people about their experiences and are another way to collect data from individuals through conversations and asking questions.

A semi-structured interview was utilized by the researcher. A semi-structured interview is a qualitative research method that combines a pre-determined set of open questions (questions that prompt discussion) with the opportunity for the interviewer to explore themes or responses further (Barclay, 2018). In this case, the students’ interlanguage system and teacher-participants’ epistemological views were ascertained.

Data Collection Procedures

Data collection started during the second semester of the school year 2021-2022. Letters of consent were given to School Principal, concerned Teachers of English, and 10 selected Senior High School students for the conduct of the study were secured.

The student-participants were asked to write a three-part essay. It took 3 weeks to complete their essay, with a week interval for each part. Part I is about their struggle as a student amidst the Pandemic. Part II is about being given the chance to be the Secretary of Education on how they will lead the Department of Education during the Pandemic. Part III is about their perception of success. They were briefed to write at least a basic composition where it consists of complete parts of the essay or the three-part type of essay. There is an introduction, body, and conclusion.

Corpus analysis then followed that focused mainly on the committed interlanguage errors of selected Grade 11 HUMSS students in their written essays. Errors that focused specifically on verb tense and subject-verb agreement was then examined, identified, classified, and analyzed.

Moreover, the interlanguage errors committed by G-11 SHS students were verified by an interview. The said errors were presented to the learners and were asked about their awareness of such error- making process.

Likewise, the same errors that were collated were also presented to their teachers in the said subject, the researcher asked about their epistemological beliefs on the committed errors of their students and how they deal with them as second language teachers. This was a face-to face interview.

All the interview process both for student and teacher participants were recorded and were transcribed. The transcribed interview script response was then examined and analyzed. Codes and themes were identified and interpreted.    Significant findings that are beneficial in this study were identified. The data findings of the study were significant in the proposed intervention in helping second language learners as well as teachers in dealing with interlanguage errors.

Data Analysis Procedures

 Data analysis started from identifying grammatical errors on written essays focusing on subject-verb agreement and tenses of the verb. Written essays were then read and examined; errors were identified and classified.

Data analysis was anchored on Pit Corder’s (1974) steps on error analysis: collection of data containing errors, identification of errors, description of errors and explanation of errors.

It was then followed by identifying the interlanguage system of the student participant through an interview with them. Their grammatical errors in their written essay were examined and verified through an interview, they were asked if they know about subject-verb agreement and tenses of the verb. Also, they were asked of their reasons why commit such errors, if they were aware- and if they were aware, what specific strategy or interlanguage system do they use in learning their target language which is English language.

Moreover, teacher-participants were also interviewed in relation to their epistemological beliefs, they were asked about their views on error, how do they deal with second language errors and what strategies or approaches do they use in deal with errors.

Both interviews were recorded and transcribed, it was then analyzed using thematic coding analysis, wherein certain themes and patterns were identified as they emerged from the interview process.

After identifying the themes for each group, the researcher devised an intervention to help second language learners and teachers learn English language the easy way focusing on the area of subject and verb agreement and tenses of the verb.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The study has generated the following significant results:

Interlanguage Errors of Selected L2 Learners in Verb Tenses and Subject and Verb Agreement

Among the encountered errors in verb tenses in the written composition of G-11 HUMSS students are both interlingual errors and intralingual errors or developmental errors. Interlingual errors, also known as transfer or interference errors, are errors in second language that arise from the influence of the learner’s native language.

Errors on Tenses

Tenses make communication to be clear. Tenses are part of grammar which indicates the time when the situation takes place and detects a situation time. (Manokaran, et.al, 2013). By using tenses, there will be clear communication.

Second-language learners assume tense is a big burden. The use of verb forms is one of the most difficult areas for English language learners to master. The tense of the verb in a sentence reflects the time at which the action is set. Verb tense errors made by students in writing need more attention since verb tenses have a strong relation to academic writing (Mayaratri, 2020).

Table I Matrix on the Verb Tenses Errors

Interlingual error is the most significant source of error for all students (Angguni, 2020). Corder (1981) states that these kinds of errors occur when the learner’s habits (patterns, systems, or rules) interfere or prevent him or her, to some extent, from acquiring the patterns and rules of the second language. The identified errors were substitution errors, and omission errors

Substitution Errors

Substitution errors occur when a learner replaces a target language element (word, sound, or grammatical structure) with a similar element from their native language or a simplified version, often due to the influence of their first language. Below are errors committed by the participants in the simple past tense.

T. UNIT #4 Error 25: “Success that is not given up but is confront (confronted) and fought for.”

T. UNIT #8 Error 36: “No one help (helped) me in the time that I’m(was) so pressured.”

As seen from the transcription units above, most of the errors of student participants in simple past tense are that they still wrote the verb in its present tense form rather than in past tense form. This is an example of syntactical substitution errors wherein the learner uses a different tense from the correct tense of the verb because their native language has a different tense structure.

Generally, in the English language simple past tense is formed by adding “d”, “ed”, or “ied” to the base form of the verb, however, many irregular verbs take on a completely different form in the past tense. Some people call this the V2 form of the verb.

On the other hand, in Filipino language, the past tense is formed by adding the prefix “Nag” or “um” depending on the verb root. In Tagalog, “nag” is a common verb marker used to denote past tense. Verbs in Tagalog typically start with this marker to indicate action that occurred in the past. For example:– Nagluto (cooked) si Inay ng masarap na hapunan (Mom cooked a delicious dinner.)

Based on the given examples of how the past tense is formed in the English language compared to the Filipino Language there is a great difference between the two; the former add suffixes such as d, ed, or ied and had some special case for irregular verbs, while the latter is formed by adding prefix “nag” and suffix ma and infix in for irregular verbs.

Hence, committing errors on the part of second language learners such as G11 HUMSS students is inevitable knowing that the structure of their native language is completely different from their target language which is English.

Mastering various sets of grammar rules makes second language learners confused according to Somalinog, et.al., (2018). Their study concluded that students struggle to remember and apply grammar rules and patterns. This type of error is then identified as substitution where second-language learners substitute the correct tense with the wrong one Al-Shujair, (2017).

Here, the student participants in transcription unit numbers 4 and 8 substituted the past tense with the present tense. They seem to be aware of the events that have happened in the past tense, yet; they wrote present tense for example the word help- instead of using helped a participant wrote ..” no one help” and instead of writing “when I was pressured “he wrote no one helped me in the time that I’m pressured” in this case, it is implied that the student participant do not fully understand the rules in verb tenses in the target language which is English. They focus more on the content than on the right tense that must be used to convey the right message.

Failure to use the correct tense is failing to convey the right message. Therefore, the errors made in this type can be due to the false concepts hypothesized. A false concept hypothesis happens when learners of a language do not understand a distinction in the target language. (Richards, 1974). This type of error falls under intralingual errors or developmental errors. Richards, (1971) intralingual errors result from faulty learning of the target language.

Errors of Omission

Errors of omission happen when a learner forgets to include a word or grammatical feature that is required in the target language. It occurs when a learner leaves out a necessary grammatical element or word, often due to simplification or interference from their native language. It is the lack of some elements which should exist (Kusumawardhani,2017).

Below are the examples of errors of omission in simple future tense.

T. UNIT #2 Error 11: “I have shown (will show) them that I can do anything just to help them.”
T. UNIT #13 Error 14: I’m not afraid to be rejected or to commit mistake and being fail (to fail) for the reason that it is part of our life.”
T. UNIT #14 Error 37: “In the things that you need to fixed (fix) and finished (finish).”

In the English language, the simple future tense, according to the Cambridge Dictionary, is defined as “the form of a verb that you use when talking about something that will happen or exist.” Specifically, simple future tense is used to denote an action that will happen in the future. Its structure is as follows: Subject + Auxiliary verb(will) + Base form of the main verb + the rest of the sentence, e.g. I will learn a new language.

Moreover, in Filipino language, simple future tense is formed by affixing the verb root with various affixes that indicate an intended action in the future timeframe.

Based on the following examples, it can be inferred that there is an eminent variance between the two languages the native and the target language of the student participant, forming a simple future tense in the native language is different from the target language, in the English language, simple future tense is formed by adding will on the base form on the verb and if it is informal or casual it can be by using be verbs plus going to while in the Filipino language, it can be formed by affixing to the root verb- it can be by prefixing, infixing, and by circumfixing. Thus, there is a notable difference, and committing an error is likely to happen.

As seen above the errors committed in the simple future tense can be classified as errors of omission. Omission is the absence of one or more words that must appear in a well-formed construction. According to Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982), there are four categories of errors based on the surface strategy taxonomy. They are omission, addition, misformation, and misordering.

Intralingual Errors

Richard (1974) states that intralingual interference refers to items produced by learners, which reflect not the structure of mother tongue, but generalization based on partial exposure of the target language. Brown (1980) said that it has been found that the early stages of language learning are characterized by a predominance of interlingual transfer, but once that learner has begun to acquire parts of the new system, more and more transfer generalization within the target language is manifested. Richard (1974) classifies the intralingual errors into four categories including over generalization, ignorance of rule restrictions, incomplete application of the rules, and false concept hypothesized, or semantic errors as cited by (Sari, 2018)

Overgeneralization Errors

Overgeneralization occurs when a learner exhibits signs of mastering a general rule but is still ignorant of the interlanguage strategy of overgeneralization. It is the phenomena of overextending a rule to cover situations to which that rule does not apply. The overgeneralization of some rules and characteristics of the target language may be the cause of some of the interlanguage system’s rules. This phenomenon can manifest in a variety of ways, including morphological, syntactic, and semantic. Overgeneralization of l2 rules according to Selinker (1972), second language learners employ overgeneralization as a tactic to become more comfortable speaking the target language as cited by (Muriungi et.al, 2018).

According to Tom Scovel, “overgeneralization” occurs when learners assume that a new rule or pattern in the target language works without exception”. Put differently, the practice of applying a linguistic or interlinguistic rule when an exception rather than the rule is required is known as overgeneralization. As they apply what they already know about a language and understand its limitations through negotiation or feedback, both children and language learners overgeneralize as a normal aspect of language acquisition (Multilingual Pedagogy and World Englishes, n.d.).

Below are errors committed by the participants in the simple present tense

T. UNIT # 17 Error 18: “The students also, did not received (receive)the break from school that they deserve.”
T. UNIT #19 Error 19: “I believe that teachers should be paid more than what they currently received. (receive)”
T. UNIT #15 Error 38: You don’t realized (realize) that you are too stressed and tired.

Based on the sample errors committed by the student participants, it is observed that instead of using the base form of the verb it used the past tense form of the verb.

In the English language, the simple present tense is one of several forms of present tense in English. It is used to describe habits, unchanging situations, general truths, and fixed arrangements. It is formed by just using the base form of the verb: (I take, you take, we take, they take) The 3rd person singular takes an -s at the end. (he takes, she takes) The Present Simple tense in English is a verb tense used to express actions that are habitual or generally true. It’s often used for daily routines, facts, and feelings or states of being. The structure of the sentence typically includes the subject followed by the base form of the verb, with an ‘s’ added in the third-person singular. For example, “I play soccer” or “He plays soccer”.

In the Filipino language, the simple present tense is formed by affixing root words. A core aspect of Tagalog grammar is the use of root words and affixes to form verbs in the present tense. Root words serve as the fundamental building blocks, while affixes modify these roots to convey specific meaning and context.

In the present tense, the most common affixes used are -um-, mag-, ma-, -in, and -an. These affixes are strategically placed within root words to create a meaningful expression.

Filipino grammar is unique in its method of conjugating verbs in the present tense. Unlike English, which follows a subject-verb-object (SVO) pattern, Tagalog uses the verb-subject-object (VSO) pattern. This means that the verb is placed at the beginning of the sentence, followed by the subject and object.

Thus, comparing the tenses of the two languages, it is obvious to be completely dissimilar, while in the English language present tense is formed by writing its root verb or by adding s if it is in 3rd person and if it is in the Tagalog language it is formed by adding affixes, it can either be prefixed such as “mag”, “ma”, infixed such as “um”, “in” and suffixed such as “ma” and “an”.

Looking at the committed errors of the student participants such as “The students also, did not received (receive)the break from school that they deserve.” Here the student participant wrote received instead of receiving, also this one “I believe that teachers should be paid more than what they currently (received). And this one too; You don’t realized (realize) that you are too stressed and tired. Based on these examples of writings it can be concluded that these are all examples of errors of overgeneralization.

Overgeneralization takes place when a learner extends the use of a grammatical rule beyond its accepted usage e.g. “you don’t realized that you are too tired and stressed” instead of “you don’t realize …in this case, the student-participant used the past tense marker “d” even though it’s not applicable, thus errors are committed. A process known as overgeneralization occurs when first-, second-, or additional language learners apply a rule or pattern in a context where it does not apply in the target language, leading to a nonconventional form. It is most noticeable in morphology, where it is frequently called overregularization, but it is also present in the fields of syntax, phonology, and argument structure. Unlike rote memorization, overgeneralization demonstrates the application of rules, analogical reasoning, or the usage of a template. Thus, it shows that a language learner has learnt the language as a system and is able to identify and use regularities. (McKercher, 2018).

Errors in Subject and Verb Agreement

Subject-verb agreement is an essential component to be mastered by English Language Learners to produce a good writing. Examining the students’ errors on writing is part of the evaluation in English language learning and teaching. To produce a good writing, the English language learners must be able to know the rules of the language use. However, the English learners still struggle in mastering the subject-verb agreement in writing (Hardi et.al.,2022)

Agreement in speech and in writing refers to the proper grammatical match between words and phrases. Parts of sentences must agree, or correspond with other parts, in number, person, case, and gender.

The errors in subject and verb agreement are false concept hypothesis, errors on ignorance on the restriction of rule, and incomplete application of rules.

Table II Matrix On Errors In Subject And Verb Agreement

Errors on False System or False Concept Hypothesis

False concept hypothesis are errors arising from a learner’s incomplete or incorrect understanding of target language distinctions, leading to the formation of flawed concepts or rules. This hypothesis posits that learners’ errors can stem from their faulty comprehension of distinctions within the target language, leading them to form incorrect hypotheses or concepts about how the language works. Below are errors in English auxiliaries due to false concept hypothesis:

1. Plurality- (Primary Auxiliary Verb)(Was/Were), (Has/Have), (Do/Does), (Is/are-Be Verb)

Among the errors encountered in this study are errors in the use of English Auxiliaries which are committed by the student-participants. These be verbs, have verbs and do verbs are called primary auxiliary verbs.

Some of the example errors on auxiliary verbs are as follows:

* T. Unit #11: Like me, who were(was)already suffering with mental health.

* T. Unit #4 …as if he were- (was)

*T. Unit #20 As a student, receiving such medals and awards are (is) what I currently call a success.

*T. Unit # 22 other people who has (have) great knowledge- will only implement face-to-face classes in those schools that has (have) very low cases of Covid 19.

*T. Unit #19 A lot of people does (do) not have…-

*T. Unit#4 … so that the students does (do) not feel rushed when answering their modules.

These errors in auxiliary verbs are evident in the written composition of the student participants. To-be verbs are used to describe the state or quality of something. This is a very much utilized verb in the English language because to-be verbs can be used as a main verb and as an auxiliary verb. Thus, it is impossible to write a complete sentence without a verb. The present forms of to be, is, are, and being, while the past forms are, was, were, and been.

Auxiliaries are one of the main types of verbs in English grammar. Although they do not have their meaning, the auxiliaries can perform different functions by expressing tense (providing time reference, i.e. past, present, or future), grammatical aspect (expressing the way a verb relates to the flow of time), modality (expressing necessity, permissibility and probability, and negations of these), voice (describing the relationship between the action expressed by the verb and the participant identified by the subject, object, etc.), or adding emphasis to the sentence.

It is implied that student-participants find it hard since there are no auxiliary verbs in the Filipino language, thus these errors were committed. In the Filipino language, it only has the linking verb “ay” regardless of the tense. It is commonly written after the subject or before the predicate.

In Filipino, the closest equivalent of the verb to be is the linker ay. It is not a verb and is, therefore, never conjugated. There is no such thing as nag-ay, nag-aay, mag-ay, mag-aay, and so on. Moreover, the linker ay is only used for sentences in SVO structure (Subject-Verb-Object). This structure is also known as an unusual sentence order and is not often used for conversational.

Thus, with this language difference, errors are committed, and the interlanguage system of second-language learners is present in trying to learn their target language which is the English language.

From the given example of errors committed by the student participants, this is expected since the structure of the native and the target language of the second language is exactly different.

It is implied that this is a product of the building of a false system or false concept hypothesis- wherein the learner does not fully understand the system of the target language Richards, (1974) just like this response of Participant 9, “I thought it is just ok for plural subject to use has.”

Errors Of Ignorance of Rule Restriction

Ignorance of rule restriction refers to a learner’s failure to recognize or apply the limitations of a grammatical rule, leading to its misuse or overgeneralization in contexts where it doesn’t apply. This type of error occurs when a learner fails to understand that a particular rule has specific contexts or limitations where it is applicable, and therefore incorrectly applies it in other contexts. Below are errors in subject and verb agreement in the use of English plural markers:

Other errors encountered in this study are errors in the use of plural markers. A noun is plural when it represents two or more people, places, things, or ideas. You can identify most plural nouns because they end in –s or –es, although there are plenty of exceptions. Irregular plural nouns each have their special plural forms. Some of the example errors on plural markers are as follows:

* T. UNIT ERROR #6 …just like the waves, which never stops-(stop) and only flows-(flow)
* T. UNIT ERROR #7: Teachers who needs (need) a rest
*T. UNIT #5 ERROR #10: …we still needs (need) to face life’s challenges
T. UNIT # 15 ERROR 17: I believed that the students had suffered from online and modular class- (classes)
T UNIT #20 ERROR 21-22:…because of the low salary, they tend to find high-paying job (jobs) to support their family (families)
T. UNIT #1 ERROR 23:

Every human being want (wants) success.

T. UNIT #4 ERROR 25: …the teachers should be the one (ones) to teach us
T. UNIT #9 ERROR 24: until you breaks (break) down yourself.

A plural noun is a noun that refers to more than one person, place, thing, or idea. Most singular nouns are made plural by adding a suffix, usually –s or –es. For example, the singular noun dog takes the plural form dogs, as in three dogs. However, there are irregular plural nouns that take unique forms.

There are many different rules regarding pluralization depending on what letter a noun ends in. Irregular nouns do not follow plural noun rules, so they must be memorized or looked up.

A noun is plural when it represents two or more people, places, things, or ideas. You can identify most plural nouns because they end in –s or –es, although there are plenty of exceptions.

To make a regular noun plural, you add –s or –es to the end, depending on the word’s ending. Sometimes, letters of the original word get changed to make the plural form, such as half, and its plural form, halves. Irregular plural nouns are an exception. Each irregular plural noun has its unique plural forms, such as mouse and its plural, mice, or goose and its plural, geese.

Based on the errors committed by the student participants and the discussions about the plural markers between the English language and the Filipino language, errors are expected to take place. In the English language, a plural is formed by basically adding s, or es on the word and a lot of rules depending on the spelling of the word, not to mention the irregular noun wherein there are no exact rules to be followed but you only must be familiar or to memorize those words.

On the contrary, in the Filipino language plural markers are used in denoting the plurality of nouns, plural markers such as “sina”, “nina”, “kina” and “mga” signify those nouns used in the sentence are plural in form. In the English language, the spelling of the noun is changed, but in the Filipino language, it uses plural markers, thus, on the part of the second language learners an interlanguage is likely to happen. Interlanguage system means the kinds of language that can be produced by second language learners in the process of acquiring or learning a new language (Richard, et.al.,1996).

* T. UNIT ERROR #6 …just like the waves, which never stops-(stop) and only flows-(flow)

* T. UNIT ERROR #7: Teachers who needs (need) a rest

*T. UNIT #5 ERROR #10: …we still needs (need) to face life’s challenges

These errors above are examples of errors of ignorance of rule restriction and false concept hypothesis (Richards, 1974). Ignorance of rule restriction occurs when the learner fails to understand that the existing rule is restricted to a specific context and therefore should not be applied in other contexts.

PARTICIPANT 6: “Because the word “you” is in singular form” RESEARCHER: ok so you mean to say, your idea before of subject & verb agreement is that if the subject is plural, we add s to our verb and if our subject is singular then we don’t add s. am I correct? PARTICIPANT 8: “Yes, ma’am”

The learners think that just like when the nouns are plural, they can add s or es to their noun but that is not the case and the rule for plurality in verbs. In the subject and verb agreement rule the verb must agree to its subject, but they are confused that they think that the rule applies to all, which is a case of overgeneralization.

Incomplete Application of Rules

Incomplete application of rules, a type of intralingual error, occurs when a language learner fails to fully apply the rules of the target language, often simplifying structures or omitting elements, resulting in grammatically incorrect sentences. This error may occur when learner fails to apply the rules completely due to the stimulus sentence.

The following sentences below are examples of errors in the use of “One of the”, such as “Each”, and “Some”

T. UNIT#1 ERROR# 31: “Being in charge of one of the biggest position (positions) in the Department of Education isn’t an easy thing
T. UNIT #2 ERROR# 9: “DepEd is one of the most important department (departments)”
T. UNIT #6 ERROR# 16: “Education has been one of the most focused department (departments)in the governance
T. UNIT #6 ERROR# 34:” Some wants(want) to be an engineer, a doctor, a pilot, etc.”
T. UNIT #7 ERROR 35: “Some defines (define) success when someone achieves what he/she has been trying to have, like becoming what you have been dreaming of”.
T. UNIT #1 ERROR 21:” Every human being want (wants) success.”

In the English language, especially on subject and verb agreement, there are rules about the use of the phrase “one of the” and words some and every. While, in the Filipino language, “one of the” phrase is translated as “isa sa mga”. Some of the example sentences are as follows:

‘Isa sa mga dahilan ng pagbagsak ng ekonomiya ay dahil sa korapsyon.”

This phrase is understood as a plural marker, meaning one of the many reasons. With a different set of grammar rules and structures, second language learners will undoubtedly commit errors.

Based on given examples of committed errors above it can be inferred that the student-participants applied incomplete application of rules. They don’t have the mastery of rules of the target language, which is English, committing error is inevitable.

Hence, these errors identified above are both products of interlingual errors (negative transfer) or interference from the native language, from one point the Filipino language may have a few similarities to the English language but not as similar, which leads to committing errors. Furthermore, upon learning the language developmental errors when learning the grammar rules were not fully understood leading to learners creating their learning strategies or interlanguage systems in coping with their learning the second language.

In the study of English errors, Richards (1997) points out that error is not only caused by interference from the mother tongue, but also what he calls overgeneralization, ignorance of the rule’s restriction, incomplete application of rules, and false concepts hypothesized. These types of errors are called developmental errors. (Qiao, 2020). Errors identified above are both a combination of interlingual and intralingual errors.

2)  Interlanguage Systems Derived from Second-Language Learners’ Errors in Verb Tense and Subject and Verb Agreement

Interlanguage is a language error made by non-native speakers using a second language. According to (Selinker,2009) the term interlanguage is referred to as second language systematic knowledge independent of first language and second language. Likewise (Richard et. Al.,1996) said that interlanguage is one of the kinds of language that can be produced by second language learners in the process of acquiring or learning a new language. Thus, learners create their language system apart from their native and target language, it is a unique system they use along with their acquisition of their target language.

Learning strategies here refer to language learners’ employment of certain strategies in second language learning before they are proficient in the language. They include transfer, simplification, reduction, omission, substitution, restructuring, and formulaic language which may benefit the language learners. This will directly influence the development of interlanguage (Qiao, 2020).

Based on the interview with the ten Grade 11 student- participants coming from the HUMSS strand, they were asked about their knowledge of verb tenses and subject & verb agreement, and their errors committed were presented to them.

Almost all the participants (eight out of ten) when asked responded that they had already forgotten the rules in verb tenses and subject and verb agreement and only two said that they knew the rules. Also, they are only somewhat familiar, but they don’t have any mastery of those rules.

Understanding grammatical rules enables learners to construct accurate sentences and convey their thoughts and ideas effectively. Without grammar, communication can become confusing or even misleading. Consider a scenario where incorrect grammar alters the intended meaning of a phrase.

 Some of the responses of the student participants (3 out of 8 who said they are not familiar of the tenses and subject and verb agreement).

P1: “Medyo limot, (I quite forgot it already)” : familiar, but I already forgot I need examples so that I‘ll know

P2: “Not really po, actually, no po”, “Sounds familiar but I cannot remember it anymore”

P3: “Not anymore”, “I already forget.”

Based on the responses of the participants, it is implied that they are not fully aware of the grammatical rules of the tense of the verb and subject and verb agreement. Mastery of the grammatical rules enable learners to construct accurate sentences and convey their thoughts and ideas effectively.

Without grammar, communication can become confusing or even misleading, it alters the intended meaning of a phrase or sentence (Subramaniam, 2023). Conscious understanding of the target language system is necessary if learners are to produce correct forms and use them appropriately (Schmidt, 1990).

Anyone who wants to master a foreign language must have grammatical knowledge. When a child learns to speak, he acquires his native language naturally and automatically and uses grammar rules orally. Most children start learning a foreign language only in elementary school. Here they get acquainted with the system of rules of the language. From the teachers’ viewpoint, the topic “grammar” does not appeal to students, and they find it uninteresting. It lays out the grammar rules that students need to learn to speak correctly. Students should not only memorize grammatical rules but also be able to use them in various speech or writing situations.

Thus, knowledge of grammar is not the goal of learning a foreign language, but the ability to speak or to write the target language correctly is important (Faresat et.al., 2023).

Two out of ten participants said that they were familiar with the tense of the verb and subject and verb agreement.

P4: “Yes po, past, present & future tense, “Is it the plurality or singularity of the subject?

P5: “Yes po, past, present, and future tense”, “I will recall po, the subject is the one being talked about and the verb is the one that defines the subject.

Here, these two participants can easily recall the rules of verb tenses and subject and verb agreement, they somewhat are more familiar compared to the rest of the participants, but in a deeper sense, almost all of them have some misconceptions and misunderstandings about the grammatical of rules of verb tenses and subject and verb agreement that affect their mastery of their target language.   Some of the excerpts of their responses are the following:

P4: “It is just my idea…”

P5: “I think I did not check it well…”

Furthermore, learning strategies can be seen as part of the cognitive process in which learners form, test, and revise hypotheses (Faerch et.al., 1980). Learners use tactics to plan their learning, monitor their progress, tackle specific learning tasks, and compensate for communication problems. Tactics are highly variable. No two learners adopt precisely the same set of tactics. Tactics account for why learners vary in the speed with which they acquire an L2 (Ellis, 1989).

Interlanguage System of the Student-Participants

All the themes and categories for the interlanguage system of the student-participant were coined by the researcher but still look for equivalent systems applicable to it supported by literature and studies. The interlanguage systems found were divided into two categories by the researcher the first category is internal, and the second one is external. Internal means how the learner does with what he/she perceives and knows, while external is tapping or using external resources to get some help in learning their target language. Under the internal category, audio-perceptual approximation is the term coined by the researcher, (it means listening to one written sentence and if it sounds correct then they perceive it to be grammatically correct), literal translation, reviewing grammar lessons, and double-checking their work.

On the other hand, under the external category are the following: asking for help from siblings and friends or making use of their social networks or support system and use of grammar checker applications.

Table III matrix Of The Interlanguage System Of L2 Learners

The responses from the participants on audio-perceptual approximation are as follows:

P1: “I’m confused, I can’t explain it, I think it is the one suited and fitted for the sentence, and I just listen at when you read or say it, -it sounds correct”.

P5: “I think I did not check it well, also pleasant to my ears, I think if it sounds right, it is already correct.” PARTICIPANT 6: “I think if it sounds right then it is correct.”

P10: “…I just read it and listen to my words then if it sounds right then, I think it is already grammatically correct.”

The audio-perceptual approximation is in response to the False Concept Hypothesized by Richards (2014) wherein there is an incomplete or incorrect understanding of target language distinctions. It is considered by Richards (2014) L1, because of faulty or partial learning of the L2, rather than from language transfer (Deng, 2019).

Here, the learners just make hypotheses or assumptions that possibly by just audibly hearing and perceiving it to be correct then they already conclude it to be grammatically correct. It is their way of adapting to learning their target language.

P4: “It is just my idea.”

P6:” I think it is the correct one because I think it is incomplete to use dance only”

P6: “I think if it sounds right then it is correct.”

The student participants just thought or assumed “I think…” means they don’t have a basis, or they are not sure of the specific grammatical rule that they are using-thus errors are committed. Thus, this is also an example of a false concept hypothesized (Richard, 1997).

Internal Category

Literal Translation

Literal Translation errors happen because a student translates his first language sentence or idiomatic expression into the target language word by word. Literal translation is a type of interlingual error or native language interference wherein the learner is still influenced by his native language.

One of the student-participants also said that he directly translates word for word the meaning of each word for him to create a sentence, he also added that he is confused when he is writing in the medium of the target language unlike with his native language where he is more relaxed in expressing himself.

P1: “…it depends on my translation po”, “Honestly, it’s different if I am going to write in Tagalog because I can freely express my ideas because I am confused.”

Literal translation occurs when text is translated word-for-word from one language to another. It does not pay much attention to the meaning of a text (Postan, 2023). When a person learns a new language, they initially translate the words and phrases back and forth in their mind, from their native language to the target language. This translation process can be challenging and time-consuming. It can also lead to misunderstandings and misinterpretations if the translation is not accurate.

Moreover, the structures and grammar of the mother tongue can also affect the learning of the new language. For example, some languages have more complex grammar structures; they may find it more challenging to learn a new language with a simpler grammar structure.

On the other hand, a person’s mother tongue can also be beneficial in language learning. If the new language has similarities with the mother tongue, it can make it easier for the person to learn and understand the new language. The person may also be able to recognize and remember certain words and phrases more easily. (Languages Unlimited.com, n.d.)

Reviewing Grammar Lessons and Double Checking

This type of writing strategy is considered as metacognitive strategy. This strategy is related to outlining and planning. It mainly deals with reading text that is related to topic, grammatical structure, preparing the ideas and example of writing, and giving a reward to self, such as a break the vocabulary, idea, and example of writing; and giving a reward to self, such as short break, to refresh the brain.

In addition, this strategy is also to evaluate the writing result. The evaluation of writing includes content, grammar, and vocabulary review (Juniante et.al.,2020). Motivation plays a significant role in learning a language. Brown (1980) stated that language learning will be more successful if there is a certain motivation inside the learner. Ellis (1994) considers motivation as an exertion, which learners contribute to learning a second language because of their need or desire to learn it. Motivation provides the primary impetus to initiate learning the second language and later the driving force to sustain the long and tedious learning process (Dornyei, 2001).

External Category

On the other hand, under the external category are the following: asking for help from siblings and friends or making use of their social networks or support system and using grammar checker applications. Learners’ life is not confined solely to the classroom; they have social networks. Social networks can be their family such as older siblings, parents, uncles & aunts, or anyone in the family who is more knowledgeable about the language or even their friends. Social Network Theory represents people as living within networks of relationships.

Krackhardt (1993) distinguish between advice networks, trust networks, and communication networks.

In terms of learning beyond the classroom, a learner advice network would consist of relationships with people on whom they depend for guidance or action (or to whom they provide such help) their trust network would include relationships within which they would share difficulties or look for support and their communication network could support them in discussing and clarifying what they are learning. Learning beyond the classroom may be supported by the internal network of the family and the benefits of this learning, as well as the learning itself, may spread to other family members. Thus, a family becomes a learning community (Wenger, 1998).

Social Network or Support System

This type of strategy or learners’ interlanguage system is also called by Junianti et.al., (2020) as social strategy. The most common pattern of help mentioned in Palfreyman (2011) was from older sisters to younger siblings. Some of the responses of the participants are as follows:

P 4: “…ask help from my siblings,….”

P5: …”I asked for help from those who knew better than me.”

P6: “Yes po, I ask help from my siblings.”

P8: “…I asked for help, I double-checked my work.”

P9: …” Asked help from my siblings.”

Based on the responses of the participants it is implied that there is difficulty or struggle on the part of the second language learners in mastering the target language, thus, they seek help from others. Family and friends play a significant role in the learning process of second language learners. They serve as their support system.

Use of Grammar Checker Application

In addition, two student participants said that in coping with their errors they opted to use grammar checker applications. The following are their responses:

P 3: …”I use apps”

P4: “Yes, po I use a grammar app”

The student participants view grammar checker applications as a learning tool that can help them rectify their errors in their target language. In Yang’s (2018) study she found that students displayed relatively positive attitudes toward the grammar checker and that the grammar checker could serve as a useful pedagogical tool to help grammar use for low-proficient L2 learners’ writing.

Epistemological Beliefs of L2 Teachers in Errors on Verb Tenses and Subject and Verb Agreement.

Teacher beliefs are implicit and explicit suppositions held by educators that have relevance to their professional and instructional practices, interactions with students, and learning processes (Ferguson et.al., 2021).

Teacher beliefs have been framed as suppositions such as attitudes, values, assumptions, images, intuitive screens, (pre)conceptions, personal teaching styles, and personal history–based lay theories, which was already apparent in Clark et.al., (1984) as cited in Ferguson, (2021).

Teachers’ epistemological beliefs about language learning, as we assume, play a decisive part regarding how a teacher interprets linguistic knowledge, justifies the structure and source of information, and, more generally, accounts for how the language learning process unfolds (Zhong, 2021).

Despite voluminous studies into teachers’ cognition and the role of teachers’ beliefs in their practices, not many studies have addressed the impact of teachers’ epistemological beliefs (EB, beliefs about the source of knowledge) on their teaching styles (Soleimani, 2020).

Six teacher participants are considered second language teachers since they too, are non-native. They were all teaching reading and writing subjects. Half of them are Bachelor of Science degree graduates majoring in English and the remaining half are non- majors they are all Technical Vocational Livelihood (TVL) teachers.

Since their epistemological beliefs are significant in this study the errors of those 10 student participants were presented to them, then they were interviewed in terms of their learners’ errors. Out from the responses of the teacher- participants from the questions from the interview guide among the five questions the following matrix is shown below:

Table IV matrix Of The Epistemological Beliefs Of L2 Teachers

Errors are Inevitable

In question number one, all teacher participants, as expected, encountered the same errors found in the written essays of the student participants, thus, errors are everywhere, and it is inevitable. In the process of learning a second language, it is inevitable for students to make errors from time to time. Sort of factors may exist, however, the most important reason may be lack of language competence or the deep influence from the L1 (Zhu, 2019).

Teachers’ Reaction Towards Errors

Secondly, teacher participants were asked what they felt when they encountered errors in verb tenses and subject and verb agreement committed by their learners. The following themes emerged such as disappointed (negative reaction) and challenged or (positive reaction).

Negative Reaction

A negative teacher reaction towards student grammatical errors can manifest as frustration, disappointment, or even criticism, potentially leading to a demotivating learning environment for students, where they might feel discouraged from taking risks or expressing themselves freely due to fear of being marked down for grammatical mistakes.

P1: “Disappointed, failed expectations they should have developed it since they are in Senior High School already. It is a problem.”

P2:” Disappointed and at the same time I pitied them.  They failed my expectations knowing that they reached the Senior High School level and yet they still didn’t know the basics.

P3: “When it comes to Technical Vocational Livelihood tracks, I understand them, but with the academic strands, I feel disappointed because my expectation of them is different from the TVL. I feel sad.”

P4:” It’s disappointing, knowing that they are already at that level (Expectation).”

P5:” I feel sad since they reached that grade level but still commit such errors (expectation).”

P6:” I feel determined to teach them more and think of a strategy that will help them improve their grammar skill.”

From the responses above, almost all the teacher participants felt disappointed whenever they encountered errors committed by their second language learners. Most of them have expectations that knowing they are already in a Senior High School level then students are expected that they have already mastered the basics of grammar since it has already been taught to them as early as they were in kindergarten level. It was a negative impression anchored on the theory of behaviorism. Behaviorism was a dominant theory in the early 1900s and according to the theory of behaviorism, errors represent a problem for learning.

An error means that an incorrect association has been made and will need to be replaced with the correct association, making the learning process take longer just like Participant One view on errors “Disappointed, failed expectations they should have developed it since they are in Senior High School already. It is a problem.” she views error as a problem that needs to be solved and not a learner’s system in progressing continually towards their target language.

The first school believes that errors should not be allowed to occur, and they are the signs of imperfect learning. The teachers/ linguists who have negative attitudes towards errors tend to avoid errors; they never let their students commit errors and prefer direct and immediate correction. But this act may demoralize students and obstruct enthusiasm and quest for learning.

Positive Reaction

On the other hand, there is a lone participant who said she is more determined to teach them and thinks of a teaching strategy for her learners to improve their grammar skills.

P6:” I feel determined to teach them more and think of a strategy that will help them improve their grammar skill.”

This is where cognitivists’ beliefs were anchored, they view learners’ errors as something positive, which means that learners are learning, and errors are the signs. Error analysis is one of the most influential theories of second language acquisition. It is concerned with the analysis of the errors committed by L2 learners by comparing the learners’ acquired norms with the target language norms and explaining the identified errors (James, 1988).

They don’t see errors as something to be avoided but rather as an opportunity that can help shed light on devising teaching strategies that can help second language learners. If errors are properly addressed, learners will be assisted accordingly.

The study’s findings revealed that instructors strongly agree (79%) that errors are a normal part of the learning process…, Further, very few instructors strongly agree that it is important to avoid errors during learning…, Overall, these results indicate that most instructors are open to students making errors during learning (Pan et.al., 2020).

How do teachers deal with errors?

Moving along to participants’ responses to question number three wherein they were asked this question “What do you do when you encounter errors in verb tenses and subject and verb agreement from your learners?” Almost are their responses being, they just addressed the errors and not their cause.

Corrective Feedback

Corrective feedback seems to be one of the most important aspects of any second language (L2) education or foreign language learning (FLL) as it provides important data for the learners about their progress, mistakes, and other important language issues. When a significant proportion of FLL is conducted online, it is even more important to focus on this topic as corrective feedback can be a serious challenge in any FLL both for the instructor, as the person who sends the message, but also for the receiver of this coded information, i.e., the learner (Klimova & Pikhart, 2022).

P1: “Proofread, mark/annotate errors, more reading & writing activities, motivate learners”

P3: “I check their error if I know it, I mark or annotate them and give my feedback or comments.”

P 4: “Feedbacking- inject in the lesson, identify what error has the greatest number of times committed.”

P5: “I correct their errors; I generalize my correction. I do not single out my feedback so that they will get offended.

P6:” I ask my students to read more.”

As shown from the responses of the teacher participant they’ve direct type of corrective feedback.

Error Analysis

Only one teacher- participant did a root cause analysis, she wanted to know first the reason why her learners commit such errors, she wanted to know the reasons behind such errors and not jump into any action without first knowing the real score of the matter. That is an example of cognitivism where they view errors to help the learners more in learning the second language.

P2:” I ask my students; I ask their reason why they commit such errors.”

Corder (1967) presents a completely different point of view by saying those errors are “important in and of themselves”. In his opinion, systematic error analysis can enable teachers to determine the kind of reinforcement needed in teaching. In addition, EA is found to be useful to teachers as it provides information on common trouble spots in language learning to guide the preparation of effective teaching materials and facilitates mastery and fluency of the target language.

Teachers must develop a positive attitude towards their students’ errors and suggest ways of correcting errors that will help, rather than hinder, the learning process. Mackey (1967) emphasized the importance of error perception and correction.

Specific Strategies Used by Teachers in Dealing with their Learners’ Errors

On the specific strategies used by the teacher participants, the following are their responses:

P1: “Review/recall of lessons, give additional learning materials, reading and writing activities, give a diagnostic test, give specific discussions, use supplemental learning videos, and involve parents”

P2: “I explain, and discuss with them the right thing to do, I chat in our GC, and I give my general directions and feedback on how to correct errors. I give more examples or activities.”

P3: “I advise my students to always double-check their work. I encourage them to read.”

P4: “Feedbacking- inject in the lesson, identify what error has the greatest number of times committed.”

P5: “I correct their errors; I generalize my correction. I do not single out my feedback so that they will not get offended.”

P6: “I provide timely feedback and tell them not to get discouraged with their progress.

About the responses of the teacher participants on what specific action they take when they encounter errors in their learners’ written works, most of them said that they do feedback.

Feedback is a compelling influence on learner achievement. When teachers seek or at least are open to what learners know, what they understand, where they make errors, when they have misconceptions when they are not engaged then teaching and learning can be synchronized and powerful. Feedback is useful where there is a lack of knowledge, especially the failure of students to use language correctly. Error correction is a way to develop competence of language learners in a second or foreign language. It can be used to attain conscious knowledge of a second or foreign language and to learn the language’s rules (Khansir, et. al.,2018).

Feedback to teachers makes learning visible. Feedback is a key element of the incremental process of ongoing learning and assessment. Providing frequent and ongoing feedback is a significant means of improving achievement in learning. It involves the provision of information about aspects of understanding and performance and can be given by practitioners, peers, oneself, and from learners to practitioners.

Truscott’s claim is supported by earlier research which suggested that correction had little or no effects on student writing (Kepner, 1991; Sheppard, 1992). In Kepner’s (1991) experiment, students were provided with two types of written feedback: message-related comments and surface error-corrections. It was found that the consistent use of L2 teachers’ written error corrections as a primary medium of written feedback was ineffective in L2 writing, whether for higher-proficiency or lower-proficiency learners. In contrast, the consistent use of message-related comments was effective in promoting both overall quality and surface-level accuracy as cited in (Gottaser, 2018).

Corrective or formative feedback is defined as “information communicated to the learner that is intended to modify his or her thinking or behavior to improve learning” (Shute, 2008). It is also important to take note that there are two types of corrective feedback: implicit and explicit. Implicit corrective feedback can simply be restating an error-filled response in a correct format. Explicit feedback would be specifically pointing out why and how the answer was wrong, followed by an explanation of the correct way to use the language (Teachhub.com, 2020).

All the teacher participants did the explicit type of corrective feedback, they did something to address their learners’ errors, identifying what specific errors must be given attention, they also used varied error correction strategies such as giving additional activities like reading and writing activities, incorporating the use of technology in using videos as teaching supplement, using positive feedback- of not being harsh on their learners considering their emotional welfare teachers must focus on the performance and not the personal traits of a student when correcting (Teachhub.com, 2020), and involving the parents of the learners.

Involving parents and families in the learning process by providing them with more frequent feedback about their child’s learning progress and strategies they may use to assist their child to improve is effective in improving student achievement. (Vic.gov.au) Studies have approved direct or explicit feedback to have more benefits due to its enforcement to students’ metacognitive processes (Soe, 2022).

Second-Language Teachers’ View of Errors

When asked how they view errors, the following themes emerge the behaviorists’ point of view and the cognitivists’ point of view. The behaviorists point of view – “Errors are problems that need to be solved.”

Behaviorism was a dominant theory in the early 1900s and according to the theory of behaviorism, errors represent a problem for learning (Nebel, 2019). Other agencies see errors because of a failure that may even impede one’s success, it means a hindrance to language learning. Bandura (1986), Barnes et.al., (1959) & Skinner (1953) suggest that errors are bad and should be avoided at all costs as cited in (Metcalfe, 2016). Among the responses of the L2 teachers:

P1: “Errors are not ok; they must be cured.”

P5: “When it comes to grammar, it needs to be corrected, because there is a rule to be followed but we must do it nicely.

Two teacher participants believe that errors are not ok, and it is something to be cured. It is negatively viewed just like the behaviorists believe that errors are unpleasant, and it is a sign of weakness, thus it is something to be avoided.

The Cognitivists Point of View- “Errors are part of the learning process, it is inevitable.”

P2: “Nobody is perfect. it is an opportunity to correct. A chance to learn, it is a need to be addressed.”

P3: I understand them. I know that there are a lot of contributing factors to why students commit such errors.”

P4: “An opportunity to teach what is right and, to guide the students. Telling them that it is not to point out that they are wrong but for them to learn and not to commit the same mistakes again.”

P6: “Errors are part of the learning process.’

Four out of six teacher participants said that errors are an opportunity to help the learners and guide them to do what is the correct thing to do especially in grammar, doing it positively, encouraging learners because they believe that no one is perfect and that there are some contributing factors such as interlanguage system that affects the learners in learning the target language.

This is what interlanguage is all about learning is not conceived as something to be avoided but errors are taken positively as an indicator of learners’ effort to learn their target language. Errors also occur during the language learning process. People who embark on learning a language that is different from their mother tongue are likely to make many errors. Tulis et al. (2016) states that errors can improve knowledge and acquisition when learners effectively deal with them.

The teachers having positive attitude towards learners’ errors take. Errors as natural and unavoidable components of teaching learning process. They opine that learning a second language is learning to communicate fluently in that language and correcting errors all the time hinders fluency. Most language teachers nowadays opine that errors should not be taken negatively as signs of failure, but they should be accepted positively as indicators of complexity of foreign language.

English Made Easy as Supplementary Material

L2 Teachers were also asked what they would recommend addressing their learners’ errors. The following themes emerged such as teacher-related factors, learner-related factors, and output-related factors.

Among the teacher-related factors are equipping oneself or having a training, diagnostic activities or assessing the commonly committed errors, teaching the fundamentals especially the grammar rules such as SVA & tenses, employing code switching especially to TVL (Technical-Vocational Livelihood) students, correcting the output of students, while the learner related factors are students are encouraged to use English language even chatting and texting. Moreover, on the output related to devising supplemental learning activities focusing on the fundamental grammar lesson suited to the learner’s level. Providing activities that are engaging, simple and easy to understand learning activities. Their end goal is to help their learners attain mastery of the target language.

Based on the gathered data, there are errors found in the written essays of student participants particularly in verb tenses and subject and verb agreement. Both participants confirmed that errors are happening in the teaching and learning process of a second language. Thus, an intervention is needed to attain if not mastery at least near mastery of the target language.

As per the experience of the teacher participants, they said that the intervention should be going back to basics, teaching the fundamentals, introduce again grammar rules such tenses of the verbs and subject and verb

agreement, specific, simple, and directly cater to the needs of the learners.

P5: Start from the beginning, review the basics of grammar, introduce them again subject and verb agreement, provide series of fun activities- remediation. More practice exercises. Code switching

P 3:” Give… materials that are simple & can be easily understood starting from simple to complex- …Use specific teaching strategies and activities that are suited to learners’ level”.

Thus, the researcher created simplified video lessons focusing on verb tenses and subject and verb agreement. Living in the 21st century with 21st century who are already digitally literate, the researcher believes utilizing grammar video lessons is an interesting and effective tool to arouse learners’ interest and engage learners to facilitate better second language learning.

Video is a form of enhanced input that floods all the senses to notice and encourage grammar acquisition (Phan, 2021). Research supports the benefits of video-based activities in drawing learners’ attention to grammatical structures and the context they are used.

Video technology provides learners opportunities “to employ and expand their communicative resources, supported by the ability to link sound, word, texts, and images in the process” (Rodgers et.al, 2014,). Video has the potential to be a powerful cognitive tool for language for language instruction because it bombards the mind stimulating the senses and emotions, making learning more effective (Phan, 2022).

In a study by Freire (2022) on the impact of the implementation of flipped classrooms to improve the low development of cognitive skills in students and to promote autonomous learning in 30 English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students Level Four in the English Center at Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo through grammar video lessons.  The proposal consisted of eight grammar video lessons based on the syllabus designed for this level. These videos became both: a valuable tool to foster independent learning and a strategy to flip the traditional classroom, which allowed additional time to work on practical activities in the classroom, considering that the theory was studied outside the classroom. and verb agreement rules to ensure mastery of grammar skills.

Once the study ended, the students concluded that the grammar video lessons were effective and useful in achieving independence in learning the English grammar rules. Students who were part of the intervention reached a level of autonomous learning that influenced the students’ grades as shown in the interpretation and analysis of the results. Additionally, students felt motivated because they had less “homework.” Thus, it is concluded that grammar video lessons foster independent learning.

Code switching in the context of second language learners refers to the act of alternating between their native language and the language they are learning (the target language) during communication, often used by teachers to clarify concepts, build understanding, and support comprehension, especially when learners are still developing their proficiency in the new language. It acts as a bridge between the learner’s familiar language and the target language, allowing them to access complex ideas or vocabulary more easily.

At the language level, code-switching alternates between two languages, usually the speaker’s native language (L1) and another language (L2), during communication. When teaching grammar or introducing new vocabulary, CS may be necessary. In classes where grammar is taught explicitly, CS is practically inevitable. Because students are not proficient in understanding grammar explanations in the target language, code-switching eases anxiety and improves learning capacity for non-native speakers. Even teachers who teach grammar implicitly by practicing certain grammar structures find it helpful sometimes to code-switch to answer students’ questions.  EFL classroom code-switching helps in mitigating students’ anxiety. In its affective function, CS contributes to creating a rapport between teachers and students. It makes students feel that the teacher understands their linguistic/cultural background and helps them understand they can communicate with the teacher in their native language if necessary.

Code-switching in EFL classrooms helps to resolve confusion or misunderstanding regarding vocabulary and grammar. In its equivalent function, CS assists students in keeping the flow during conversation and expressing themselves without gaps. Even in monolingual classes, where teachers insist on the use of English only, CS should be allowed in this function and as a tool to introduce new vocabulary (Argenio, 2023).

In conclusion, the researcher devised a video lesson focusing on teaching grammar in a simpler way using code switching as a medium of instruction-teaching the fundamentals, teaching it a simpler yet engaging way. It is titled as “English Made Easy” a video lesson that aims to teach subject and verb agreement and verb tenses in a manner that second language learners will easily understand the lesson, it is a thorough and comprehensive discussion of rules with given examples, it is also an interactive type of video lesson wherein students will be engaged all throughout the discussion.

CONCLUSIONS

The study’s findings led to several key conclusions, shedding light on the interlanguage status of second-language learners and providing valuable insights into the subject at hand:

1) Errors are part of learning a second language. All the student participants under the HUMSS strand commit interlanguage errors. There is familiarity with the rules of verb tenses and subject and verb agreement but there is no mastery, thus the likelihood of chance of errors occurring is high. The different types of errors found are interlingual interference (negative transfer) of L1 or native language and intralingual such as overgeneralization, omission, substitution, ignorance of rules restriction, and false concept hypothesis. Student participants use their own specific interlanguage system in coping with learning English. They are aware and conscious of their learning and even their errors.

2) Interlanguage system is evident on the participants; they have created their own specific system in trying to master their target language. They are conscious of their errors, but they are not aware of the system that they are doing, they just call them a strategy in learning their second language.

3) Most of the teacher participants believe that errors are part of the learning process, especially in learning a second language. They held this belief but didn’t know that this type of system is called an interlanguage system. They understand their learners and they want to help and assist them with learning. The most used strategy in dealing with their learner’s second language errors is corrective feedback.

4) As errors and interlanguage systems are evident in the study, there is a necessity for a supplementary material to help address the needs of the learners. Among all other suggested or studied possible ways, the use of simplified video lessons on grammar rules stands out, as it seems interesting to 21st-century learners and has proven to be effective by previous studies.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Derived from the findings and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations were made:

1) This study encourages that everyone, especially educators, should have a distinct perspective on errors. Error is a natural aspect of learning a new language. Interlanguage needs to be presented, supported, and welcomed by both teachers and students of second language.

2) Conscious learning is encouraged among learners. Educating the students on the sources of errors can help them realize that although errors are not viewed positively and sometimes obstruct communication, they can facilitate foreign language learning.

3) In addition to honing their English language proficiency, educators also need to become knowledgeable about various teaching philosophies. It is advised to use efficient teaching techniques appropriate for second language acquisition. Supplying teacher’s and learner’s materials that are foreign language friendly that provide exercises that promote positive attitude on errors.

4) Teachers can create instructional strategies that particularly address specific error kinds once they have been recognized and understood. Interventions can take the form of tailored writing activities, detailed grammar teaching guided writing sessions, and the like.

5) Further Research. It is recommended that comparable research be carried out utilizing outcome-based or output-based methods for language evaluation to present a comprehensive image of the communicative skills of the learner. It is also recommended that collaborative studies include a broad range of language samples to establish a more thorough evaluation of competency.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

With utmost glory and praise to our loving God for all His goodness and mercies. For all His guidance and bestowed wisdom and strength upon me. Without Him all is void and vanity.

My sincerest gratitude to my esteemed panelists, Dr. Sherill A. Gibas, Dr. Abner L. Dellosa and Professor Anabel A. Manga for their guidance, counsel and expertise all throughout in the realization of this supplementary material as an output to my study. My huge appreciation to Dr. Susan Janer for all her accommodating assistance and guidance.

I am immensely grateful to my dearest research adviser, Dr. Ana G. Fortes, for all her constant pushing and support. Her encouragement serves as my inspiration to keep moving forward.

Moreover, I am beyond thankful to my technical team, my videographer Briana Gaspi and video editors, Inee Claire Ginete and Ruzzel James Gloriane of my video lessons, they have provided significant technical support, their assistance has greatly impacted this endeavor.

Lastly, my heart is full to my husband Arch. Darwin Fundano and daughter Bella Beatrice for all their love, prayers and unwavering support.

REFERENCES

1. Adjemian, C. (1976). ON THE NATURE OF INTERLANGUAGE SYSTEMS. Language Learning, 26(2), 297–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1976.tb00279.x
2. Agustina, V., & Junining, E. (2019). ERROR ANALYSIS IN THE TRAVEL WRITING MADE BY THE STUDENTS OF ENGLISH STUDY PROGRAM. JEELS (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies), 2(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v2i1.41
3. Alimardonova, M. B. (2021). The role of grammar in improving students’ writing skills. World Bulletin of Management and Law, 1(1), 1–4. Retrieved from https://www.scholarexpress.net
4. Alexopoulou, T. (2020). ‘Grammatical Errors: What Can We Do About Them?’, Languages, Society and Policy. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.60255
5. Amara, N. (2019). UNDERSTANDING LANGUAGE TRANSFER AND ERRORS ANALYSIS TRANSFER OR NOT: I AM THE BIGGEST IN MY FAMILY! The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 9(74). Retrieved from https://tojned.net/journals/tojned/articles/v09i01/v09i01-10.pdf
6. Baclig, C. E. (2020, November 20). Philippines drops further in global English proficiency rankings | Inquirer News. Retrieved from https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1362951/philippines-drops-further-in-global-english-proficiency-rankings#ixzz74ioE63FA
7. Baral, R. (2017). Teachers’ Attitude towards Error Correction. www.academia.edu. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/34530755/Teachers_Attitude_towards_Error_Correction
8. Bernat, E., & Gvozdenko, I. (2005). Beliefs about language learning: Current knowledge, pedagogical implications, and new research directions. TESL-EJ, 9(1). Retrieved from https://tesl-ej.org/ej33/a1.pdf
9. Cabaltica, R. B., & Osabel, C. A. (2021). Knowledge on subject-verb agreement of grade 7 students: Basis for remedial teaching. European Journal of Humanities and Educational Advancements, 2(4). Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351904329_European_Journal_of_Humanities_and_Educational_Advancements_EJHEA_KNOWLEDGE_ON_SUBJECTVERB_AGREEMENT_OF_GRADE_7_STUDENTS_BASIS_FOR_REMEDIAL_TEACHING
10. Canadian Center of Science and Education. (2017). English language teaching, 10(5). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n5p1
11. Catabay, M. Q. (2023). Analysis of Second Language Learners’ Errors in Composition Writing: Basis for the Proposed English Remedial Program in Higher Institution. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 11(4), e895–e895. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v11i4.896
12. Caulfield, J. (2019, September 6). How to do thematic analysis | Step-by-step guide & examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 20, 2025, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/thematic-analysis
13. Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition. (n.d.). What is interlanguage? University of Minnesota. Retrieved from https://archive.carla.umn.edu/learnerlanguage/interlanguage.html
14. Corder, S. P. (1975). Error analysis, interlanguage and second language acquisition. Language Teaching & Linguistics Abstracts, 8(4), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444800002822
15. Duhlicher, O. & Moldova State University. (2018). ERROR CORRECTION IN THE EFL CLASSROOM. Retrieved from https://ibn.idsi.md/sites/default/files/imag_file/60-65_23.pdf
16. GMA News. (2018, February 20). English proficiency of Pinoy students, teachers lagging — survey. GMA News Online. Retrieved from https://www.gmanetwork.com
17. Guo, Q. (2022). Interlanguage and Its Implications to Second Language Teaching and Learning. Pacific International Journal, 5(4), 08-14. https://doi.org/10.55014/pij.v5i4.223
18. Interlanguage – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics. (n.d.). https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/socialsciences/interlanguage
19. Just Learn. (2024, March 12). What are the difficulties of learning a second language and how to overcome them? Just Learn. https://www.justlearn.com/blog/what-are-the-difficulties-of-learning-a-second-language-and-how-to-overcome-them
20. Keller, T. (2016). Error Analysis in SLA. An Investigation of Errors made by Polish Learners of English. GRIN Verlag.
21. (2023, September 25). 5 common grammar errors in English as a second language and how to correct them. HubPages. https://kerlynb.hubpages.com/hub/5-Common-Grammar-Errors-in-English-as-a-Second-Language-and-How-to-Correct-Them
22. Klimova, B., & Pikhart, M. (2022). Application of corrective feedback using emerging technologies among L2 university students. Cogent Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2022.2132681
23. Korneev, M. (2022, March 19). The 5 most common challenges ESL learners face (and how to solve them) – eLearningInside News. Retrieved from https://news.elearninginside.com/the-5-most-common-challenges-esl-learners-face-and-how-to-solve-them/#google_vignette
24. Lahcen, B., & Mahmoud, B. (2022). Perspectives on Error and Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Composition Studies. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 7(2). https://ijels.com/upload_document/issue_files/3IJELS-102202214-Perspectives.pdf
25. Lee, J. C., Zhang, Z., Song, H., & Huang, X. (n.d.). Effects of epistemological and pedagogical beliefs on the instructional practices of teachers: a Chinese perspective. Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol38/iss12/8
26. Manalac, C. (2021). The challenges of modular distance learning. Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/document/551963650/The-Challenges-of-Modular-Distance-Learning
27. McKercher, D. A. (2018). Overgeneralization. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0087
28. Mencias, Y. L. E., & De Vera, P. V. (2018). Error analysis of verb tenses among Japanese ESL learners. Journal of English as an International Language, 13(2.2), 185–202. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1246990.pdf
29. Metcalfe, J. (2016). Learning from Errors. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(1), 465–489. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044022
30. Mohamad Nor, N., & Ab Rashid, R. (2018). A review of theoretical perspectives on language learning and acquisition. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 39(1), 161–167. Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/kjss/article/view/242450
31. Muftah, M. (2023). Error Analysis in Second Language Acquisition (SLA): Types and frequencies of grammatical errors of simple present and past tense in the elicited written production task of Arab EFL undergraduate learners. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 25(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.14483/22487085.19202
32. Owu-Ewie, N. C., & Williams, N. M. R. (2017). Grammatical and lexical errors in students’ English composition writing: the case of three senior high schools (SHS) in the central region of Ghana. Sino-US English Teaching, 14(8). https://doi.org/10.17265/1539-8072/2017.08.001
33. Qiao, J., Woodward, J. R., & Alam, A. S. (2021). Educational video games for learning English vocabulary. In Advances in game-based learning book series (pp. 455–471). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-7271-9.ch024
34. Rhalmi, M. (2025, March 26). Second Language Learning Difficulties: How L1 Interference & Culture Impact Fluency. Retrieved from https://www.myenglishpages.com/second-language-learning-difficulties/
35. Singh, C. K. S., Singh, A. K. J., Razak, N. Q. A., & Ravinthar, T. (2017). Grammar errors made by ESL tertiary students in writing. English Language Teaching, 10(5), 16. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n5p16
36. Sioco, E. C., & De Vera, P. V. (2018). Grammatical competence of junior high school students. TESOL International Journal, 13(1), 82–94. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1247221.pdf
37. Soleimani, N. (2020). ELT teachers’ epistemological beliefs and dominant teaching style: mixed method research. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-020-00094-y
38. Touchie, Y. (1986BC). Second language learning errors: Their types, causes, and treatment | JALT Publications. Retrieved from https://jalt-publications.org/jj/articles/1571-second-language-learning-errors-their-types-causes-and-treatment
39. Tulis, M., Steuer, G., & Dresel, M. (2016). Learning from errors: A model of individual processes. Frontline
40. Turner, M. (n.d.). What Is an ESL Teacher? | George Fox University. Www.georgefox.edu. https://www.georgefox.edu/education/articles/esl-teacher.ht
41. Vethamaiccam, M., & Ganapathy, M. (2017). Analysing errors among form one students’ written English composition in a private Chinese school. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning, 5(1), 16. Retrieved from http://www.ajouronline.com