Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal KOMUNITAS: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INDONESIAN SOCIETY AND CULTURE NADWA Dimas: Jurnal Pemikiran Agama untuk Pemberdayaan Tarbiyah Vision: Journal for Language and Foreign Language Learning LET: Linguistics, Literature and English Teaching Journal Kontribusia : Research Dissemination for Community Development
Sayyidatul Fadlilah
Unknown Affiliation
Arts Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 11 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search
Journal : LET: Linguistics, Literature and English Teaching Journal

 1 
COHESION ANALYSIS OF ISLAMIC READING TEXTBOOKS Fadlilah, Sayyidatul
LET: Linguistics, Literature and English Teaching Journal Vol 5, No 1 (2015)
Publisher : English Department of Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (555.215 KB) | DOI: 10.18592/let.v5i1.1422

Abstract

There are many students of Islamic Education and Teacher Training Facultyof IAIN Walisongo Semarang who have complained that Islamic reading texts used by their teachers are hard for them to understand. I examine this issue by seeing some linguistic aspects of those reading texts. This Qualitative and Descriptive approach highlighted the types of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices and the realization of cohesiveness of those reading textsbased on Halliday and Hasan’s theory.The result of the study shows that the six reading texts (A.1, 2, 3; and B.1, 2, 3) stated in reading textbooks: English for Islamic Studies, English for Islamic Studies 2, Understanding Islam; for Islamic Studies; in terms of cohesion (following Halliday and Hasan’s principles of reading texts) respectively the average score of anaphoric references: 54.17% for text A.3, 53.85% for text B.2, 53.06% for text A.1, 48.57% for text B.3, 41.86% for text B.1, 33.33% for text A.3. After consulting to the Halliday and Hasan’s principles of cohesion of the reading texts (1989), that the most cohesive reading texts is text A.3, whereas the least cohesive one is Text A.2. Finally, these factors will assist lecturers and students in choosing the appropriate book for them.
COHESION ANALYSIS OF ISLAMIC READING TEXTBOOKS Fadlilah, Sayyidatul
LET: Linguistics, Literature and English Teaching Journal Vol 4, No 2 (2014)
Publisher : English Department of Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (281.437 KB) | DOI: 10.18592/let.v4i2.1406

Abstract

There are many students of Islamic Education and Teacher Training Facultyof IAIN Walisongo Semarang who have complained that Islamic reading texts used by their teachers are hard for them to understand. I examine this issue by seeing some linguistic aspects of those reading texts. This Qualitative and Descriptive approach highlighted the types of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices and the realization of cohesiveness of those reading textsbased on Halliday and Hasan’s theory.The result of the study shows that the six reading texts (A.1, 2, 3; and B.1, 2, 3) stated in reading textbooks: English for Islamic Studies, English for Islamic Studies 2, Understanding Islam; for Islamic Studies; in terms of cohesion (following Halliday and Hasan’s principles of reading texts) respectively the average score of anaphoric references: 54.17% for text A.3, 53.85% for text B.2, 53.06% for text A.1, 48.57% for text B.3, 41.86% for text B.1, 33.33% for text A.3. After consulting to the Halliday and Hasan’s principles of cohesion of the reading texts (1989), that the most cohesive reading texts is text A.3, whereas the least cohesive one is Text A.2. Finally, these factors will assist lecturers and students in choosing the appropriate book for them.
COHESION ANALYSIS OF ISLAMIC READING TEXTBOOKS Fadlilah, Sayyidatul
LET: Linguistics, Literature and English Teaching Journal Vol 5, No 1 (2015)
Publisher : English Department of Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (555.215 KB) | DOI: 10.18592/let.v5i1.1422

Abstract

There are many students of Islamic Education and Teacher Training Facultyof IAIN Walisongo Semarang who have complained that Islamic reading texts used by their teachers are hard for them to understand. I examine this issue by seeing some linguistic aspects of those reading texts. This Qualitative and Descriptive approach highlighted the types of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices and the realization of cohesiveness of those reading textsbased on Halliday and Hasan?s theory.The result of the study shows that the six reading texts (A.1, 2, 3; and B.1, 2, 3) stated in reading textbooks: English for Islamic Studies, English for Islamic Studies 2, Understanding Islam; for Islamic Studies; in terms of cohesion (following Halliday and Hasan?s principles of reading texts) respectively the average score of anaphoric references: 54.17% for text A.3, 53.85% for text B.2, 53.06% for text A.1, 48.57% for text B.3, 41.86% for text B.1, 33.33% for text A.3. After consulting to the Halliday and Hasan?s principles of cohesion of the reading texts (1989), that the most cohesive reading texts is text A.3, whereas the least cohesive one is Text A.2. Finally, these factors will assist lecturers and students in choosing the appropriate book for them.
COHESION ANALYSIS OF ISLAMIC READING TEXTBOOKS Fadlilah, Sayyidatul
LET: Linguistics, Literature and English Teaching Journal Vol 4, No 2 (2014)
Publisher : English Department of Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (281.437 KB) | DOI: 10.18592/let.v4i2.1406

Abstract

There are many students of Islamic Education and Teacher Training Facultyof IAIN Walisongo Semarang who have complained that Islamic reading texts used by their teachers are hard for them to understand. I examine this issue by seeing some linguistic aspects of those reading texts. This Qualitative and Descriptive approach highlighted the types of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices and the realization of cohesiveness of those reading textsbased on Halliday and Hasan?s theory.The result of the study shows that the six reading texts (A.1, 2, 3; and B.1, 2, 3) stated in reading textbooks: English for Islamic Studies, English for Islamic Studies 2, Understanding Islam; for Islamic Studies; in terms of cohesion (following Halliday and Hasan?s principles of reading texts) respectively the average score of anaphoric references: 54.17% for text A.3, 53.85% for text B.2, 53.06% for text A.1, 48.57% for text B.3, 41.86% for text B.1, 33.33% for text A.3. After consulting to the Halliday and Hasan?s principles of cohesion of the reading texts (1989), that the most cohesive reading texts is text A.3, whereas the least cohesive one is Text A.2. Finally, these factors will assist lecturers and students in choosing the appropriate book for them.
Co-Authors Ikhrom Ikhrom Masithoh, Hanita Muhammad Saifullah Nur Antoni ET Ruswan Ruswan Sofa Muthohar Zulaikhah Zulaikhah, Zulaikhah