i READABILITY COMPARISON BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF NOVEL OF DAVID COPPERFIELD BY CHARLES DICKENS By MUHAMMAD HANIF NIM. 201132246 ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY MURIA KUDUS UNIVERSITY 2015
i
READABILITY COMPARISON
BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND SIMPLIFIED VERSION
OF NOVEL OF DAVID COPPERFIELD
BY CHARLES DICKENS
By
MUHAMMAD HANIF
NIM. 201132246
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
MURIA KUDUS UNIVERSITY
2015
ii
iii
READABILITY COMPARISON
BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF
NOVEL OF DAVID COPPERFIELD
BY CHARLES DICKENS
SKRIPSI
Presented to the University of Muria Kudus
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Completing
the Sarjana Program in the Department of English Education
By
MUHAMMAD HANIF
NIM. 201132246
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
MURIA KUDUS UNIVERSITY
2015
iv
MOTTO AND DEDICATION
MOTTO
Be the first, be the best and be
different then you’ll survive.
Great person comes with great
ideas.
Make your parents become
your purpose and your life
looks easy.
DEDICATION
The writer dedicates his works to
His beloved father, mother,
sister and brother.
His respectable aunty’s family
in Kudus.
Especially his great
grandmother who takes rest in
peace.
v
vi
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, overwhelming praise and gratitude to God Allah S.W.T, who
has given His mercies and blessing, so the writer can finish this research without
problem.
During this struggle to finish this research proposal, the writer would also like
to convey her special gratitude to:
1. Drs. Slamet Utomo, M.Pd as the Dean of the Teacher Training and
Education Faculty, for all his supports.
2. Diah Kurniati, S.Pd, M.Pd as the Head of English Education Department,
for all her supports.
3. Drs. Muh. Syafei, M.Pd as the the first advisor, for all his valuable time
and patience in guiding the writer during the process of writing this
skripsi.
4. Fajar Kartika, SS, M.Hum as the second advisor, for all of the guidance
and helps during the process of writing this skripsi.
5. All the lecturers of English Education Department, for giving new
knowledge, advices in facing life, and for giving gorgeous study
experiences.
6. The writer’s beloved family, mother, father, sister and brother who always
give spirit and love.
7. The writer’s aunty and family in Kudus for giving more experience in
facing life with values.
viii
8. All my best friends for the joy and our friendship. Especially for Eron
Abdul Azis, Ellisa Miftahul Jannah and Sugiyanto for big support.
9. All people involved during the writing process of this research.
Finally, thanks are also due to those whose names could not be mentioned
here, their contributions have enabled her completing this skripsi. The writer has a
great expectation that her study will be beneficial and useful for everybody who
interest in reading this research.
The writer realizes that this research is still far from being perfect; therefore,
the writer hopes some suggestions or critics to make it better and further research.
Kudus, May 2015
The writer
ix
ABSTRAKSI
Hanif, Muhammad. 2015. Perbandingan Keterbacaan antara Versi Asli dan Versi
Ringkasan dari Novel David Copperfield karangan Charles Dickens.
Skripsi. Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Keguruan
dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Muria Kudus. Dosen Pembimbing: (1)
Drs. Muh. Syafei, M.Pd. (2) Fajar Kartika, SS, M.Hum
Kata kunci: Keterbacaan, Novel Versi Asli, Novel Versi Ringkasan.
Pada saat ini banyak para penulis dan penerbit menciptakan karangan yang
berbentuk ringkasan (baik berupa buku, novel, koran dsb) untuk menarik lebih
banyak konsumen serta membantu pembaca untuk lebih mudah memahami isinya.
Akan tetapi tidak semua ringkasan mampu menyentuh tingkat keterbacaan yang
tepat dari target pembacanya. Keterbacaan merupakan ukuran tingkat pemahaman
terhadap bacaaan. Keterbacaan menjadi salah satu faktor yang mempengaruhi
keberhasilan kegiatan membaca sehingga seluruh pembaca harus memperhatikan
faktor tersebutt
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengukur, menganalisa dan
membandingkan tingkat keterbacaan dari versi asli dan versi ringkasan dari novel
David Copperfield karangan Charles Dickens. Cakupan penelitian ini difokuskan
pada analisa tingkat keterbacaan dari 10 paragraf pilihan dari kedua novel tersebut
dengan menggunakan formula Flesch Reading Ease dan formula Gunning FOG.
Kemudian, dalam penelitian ini penulis menggunakan metode analisis diskriptif
yang bertujuan mendeskripsikan perbedaan tingkat keterbacaan antara dua novel
tersebut. Data dalam penelitian ini berupa nilai keterbacaan yang diperoleh dari
perhitungan formula keterbacaan. Penulis menggunakan formula Flesch Reading
Ease dan Gunning FOG sebagai instrumen untuk menentukan nilai keterbacaan
dari masing-masing novel tersebut.
Hasil penelitian ini menujukan bahwa berdasarkan formula Flesch Reading
Ease novel versi asli tergolong cukup sulit dan versi ringkasanya tergolong cukup
mudah. Kemudian berdasarkan formula Gunning FOG novel versi asli tersebut
tergolong sulit sedangkan versi ringkasanya tergolong cukup mudah.
Berdasarkan hasil penelitian kualitatif ini, penulis menyimpulkan bahwa
(1) novel versi asli tersebut termasuk kategori tingkatan sulit, (2) novel versi
ringkasanya termasuk kategori tingkatan cukup mudah, dan (3) kedua novel
tersebut memiliki tingkat keterbacaan yang berbeda dimana versi ringkasan dari
novel tersebut lebih mudah terbaca dibandingkan versi aslinya. Sehingga penulis
menyarankan kepada semua pembaca, peneliti dan pelajar untuk lebih
memperhatikan aspek keterbacaan dari semua sumber bacaan yang mereka punyai
dan lebih memperkaya baham bacaan mereka agar menjadi pembaca yang kritis.
x
ABSTRACT
Hanif, Muhammad. 2015. Readability Comparison between Original and
Simplified Version of Novel of David Copperfield by Charles Dickens.
Skripsi. English Education Department, Teacher Training and Education
Faculty, Muria Kudus University. Advisor: (1) Drs. Muh. Syafei, M.Pd.
(2) Fajar Kartika, SS, M.Hum
Keyword: Readability, Original Version of Novel, Simplified Version of Novel.
Writer and publisher nowadays produce simplified publications (book,
novel, newspaper and etc.) to reach the larger consumer and help the reader easier
to understand the meaning. But then not all of the simplification success to reach
approiate readability level with their target reader. Readability is the measurement
of level of ease of understanding. Readabiliy becomes one of the factors
influences succes of reading acivity so that all readers must concern about it.
This research aims to measure, analyse and compare the readability level
of original and simplified version of the novel of David Copperfield by Charles
Dickens. The Scope of the research is focused on analysing the readability level of
10 passages selected from those novels by using the Flesch Reading Ease Formula
and the Gunning FOG Formula.. Furthermore, in this research, the writer uses the
Descriptive Analysis method since this research is aimed to describe the
readability level difference of the novels. The data of this research is the
readability score taken from the calculation of readability formula. The writer uses
the Flesch Reading Ease Formula and the Gunning FOG Formula as the
instruments to find out the readability score of the novel.
The result of this research shows that based on the Flesch Reading Ease
Formula the original version of the novel is categorized as fairly difficult level and
simplified version is categorized as fairly easy level. Then based on Gunning FOG
Formula the original version of the novel is categorized as difficult level wheather
the simplified version is categorized as fairly easy level.
Based on the result of this qualitative research, the writer concludes that
(1) the original version of the novel belongs to difficult level, (2) the simplified
version of the novel belongs to fairly easy level and (3) both those two novel has
different readability level where the simplified version is more readable than the
original one. So that the writer suggests to all reader, researcher and English
learner to pay more attention to the aspect of readability of all reading source they
have and enrich their reading materials to be critical readers.
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
COVER ........................................................................................................... i
LOGO ............................................................................................................... ii
TITLE ............................................................................................................... iii
MOTTO AND DEDICATION ........................................................................ iv
ADVISORS’ APPROVAL ............................................................................. v
EXAMINERS’ APPROVAL ........................................................................... vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................... vii
ABSTRAK ....................................................................................................... ix
ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................... x
TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................... xi
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................... xiv
LIST OF FIGURES/PICTURES ..................................................................... xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................. xvii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Research ...................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem .......................................................................... 3
1.3 Objective of the Research ......................................................................... 3
1.4 Significance of the Research ...................................................................... 3
1.5 Scope of the Research ................................................................................ 4
1.6 Operational Definition ............................................................................... 4
xii
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Readability ................................................................................................. 6
2.1.1 Concept of Readability ............................................................................ 7
2.1.2 The Factors of Readability ...................................................................... 8
2.2 Method in Assessing Readability ............................................................... 9
2.3 Readability Formula ................................................................................... 10
2.3.1 Gunning FOG index ................................................................................ 11
2.3.2 Fry Readability Graph ............................................................................. 14
2.3.3 Flesch Reading Ease Formula ................................................................. 15
2.3.4 Powers-Sumner-Kearl Formula .............................................................. 18
2.3.5 McLaughlin “SMOG” Formula .............................................................. 18
2.3.6 FORCAST Formula ................................................................................ 20
2.3.7 The Dale and Chall Original Formula ..................................................... 21
2.4 The Nature of Novel................................................................................... 23
2.4.1 Original Version and Simplified Version Novel ..................................... 24
2.4.2 The Readability of Novel ........................................................................ 27
2.5 The Novel of David Copperfield by Charles Dickens ............................... 28
2.6 Previous Research ...................................................................................... 30
2.7 Theoretical Framework .............................................................................. 32
CHAPTER III METHOD OF THE RESEARCH
3.1 Research Design ........................................................................................ 34
3.2 Data and Data Source ................................................................................. 34
3.3 Data Collecting........................................................................................... 35
xiii
3.4 Data Analysis ............................................................................................. 35
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS OF THE RESEARCH
4.1 Readability of Original Version of Novel of David Copperfield ............. 38
4.2 Readability of Simplified Version of Novel of David Copperfield .......... 48
CHAPTER V DISCUSSION
5.1 Readability of Original Version of Novel of David Copperfield .............. 58
5.2 Readability of Simplified Version of Novel of David Copperfield .......... 61
5.3 Readability Comparison of the Original and Simplified Version of
Novel of of David Copperfield by Charles Dickens ................................. 64
CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
6.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................ 70
6.2 Suggestion .................................................................................................. 70
REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 72
APPENDICES ................................................................................................ 75
STATEMENT ................................................................................................. 134
CURRICULUM VITAE ................................................................................. 135
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 2.1 The Fog Index with Reading Levels by Grade .................. 13
Table 2.2 The Fleach Reading Ease Table ......................................... 16
Table 2.3 Readability Grade Based on N ........................................... 19
Table 2.4 Dale-Call Grade-Correction Table ..................................... 22
Table 4.1 Features of Sample 1 of Original Vesion ........................... 38
Table 4.2 Features of Sample 2 of Original Vesion ........................... 39
Table 4.3 Features of Sample 3 of Original Vesion ........................... 40
Table 4.4 Features of Sample 4 of Original Vesion ........................... 41
Table 4.5 Features of Sample 5 of Original Vesion ........................... 42
Table 4.6 Features of Sample 6 of Original Vesion ........................... 43
Table 4.7 Features of Sample 7 of Original Vesion ........................... 44
Table 4.8 Features of Sample 8 of Original Vesion ........................... 45
Table 4.9 Features of Sample 9 of Original Vesion ........................... 46
Table 4.10 Features of Sample 10 of Original Vesion ......................... 47
Table 4.11 Features of Sample 1 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 48
Table 4.12 Features of Sample 2 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 49
Table 4.13 Features of Sample 3 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 50
Table 4.14 Features of Sample 4 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 51
Table 4.15 Features of Sample 5 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 52
Table 4.16 Features of Sample 6 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 53
Table 4.17 Features of Sample 7 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 54
xv
Table 4.18 Features of Sample 8 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 55
Table 4.19 Features of Sample 9 of Simplified Vesion ....................... 56
Table 4.20 Features of Sample 10 of Simplified Vesion ..................... 57
Table 5.1 Readability Level of Original Version Based on Flesch
Reading Ease Formula ....................................................... 58
Table 5.2 Readability Level of Original Version Based on Gunning
FOG .................................................................................. 60
Table 5.3 Readability Level of Simplified Version Based on Flesch
Reading Ease Formula ....................................................... 61
Table 5.4 Readability Level of Simplified Version Based on
Gunning FOG ................................................................... 63
Table 5.5 Readability Level of Original and Simplified Version of
the Novel of David Copperfield by Charles Dickens ........ 64
xvi
LIST OF FIGURES/DIAGRAMS
Figure/Diagram Page
Figure 2.1 The Fry Graph index ........................................................ 14
Figure 2.2 Title Page of First Edition of David Copperfield ........... 28
Figure 5.1 Chart of Average Sentence Length Comparison
between Original and Simplified Version ....................... 66
Figure 5.2 Chart of Average Number of Syllable Per Word
Comparison between Original and Simplified
Version of the Novel ....................................................... 67
Figure 5.3 Chart of Precentage of Hard Words of Original
Version of the Novel ....................................................... 68
Figure 5.4 Chart of Precentage of Hard Words of Simplified
Version of the Novel ....................................................... 68
xvii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Page
1. Copy of Samples of Original Version of the Novel ....................... 75
2. Copy of Samples of Simplified Version of the Novel ................... 88
3. Features Extraction and Calculation of Readability Score ............... 111
4. Syllable Identification ...................................................................... 131