This skill that brings benefits to individuals in different parts of life is of great interest and importance not only for those living in Turkey but also for the Turkish-origined citizens. Both written and verbal communication is equally important for man in general and specifically for those in Turkic Republics to be in contact with Turkey and share knowledge and culture. It is obvious that very few researches have been reported to be directly related to Turkic people and their speaking skills in Turkish (Özyürek, 2009).

Considering the literature related to Turkic people, one of the most distinguishing papers was published by Oksuz (2011). In a study on the problems faced by Turkic students learning Turkish, it was found that the students made fundamental errors regarding compound verbs, case affixes, tense suffixes, gerunds and prepositions. Oksuz suggested that audio-visual tools like TV, computer and videos be used in order to eliminate the errors made in speaking .

One study on Turkic students and their problems in learning Turkish was conducted by Ozyurek (2009) who stated that Turkic students lacked vocabulary in verbal expression, used metaphorous Turkish words and had difficulty in derivation. He also recommended that Turkic students should be considered different from other foreign students in terms of learning Turkish; Turkish should be taught accordingly and Turkish practice books for Turkic students speaking Turkish dialects should be prepared.   

Another study conducted by Açık (2008), whose sample is not completely on Turkic students, is worth citation since most of the participants were Turkish-origined students.  In his study in which 85% of the participants are Turkish- origined, the students stated that after writing with 33% difficulty, they had difficulty in speaking. In his study where vocabulary was one of the distinguishing questions, Açık pointed out that the students joined cultural activities in order to solve these lexical problems.

Finally, Yılmaz (2015) studied the problems of Kazakh students learning Turkish and found that the most problematic skill that Kazakh students experience is speaking.

According to this study, Kazakh students stated totally 36 problems regarding speaking Turkish. Insufficient vocabulary was the most distinguishing problem followed by misuse of words, lack of practice, confusion of Kazakh words and affixes with those in Turkish, lack of grammatical rules, inability to construct long and grammatical sentences, confusion of tenses. In his study, Yılmaz suggested that mass media should publish more in Turkish so that students can solve their speaking problems and more and more students’ mobility programs be actively used.  

Seeing the relevant literature, no research has been reported on speaking skills of Turkic students. The present study is therefore important in that it both contributes to the literature and reveals grammatical errors of Turkic students speaking Turkish.

Purpose of the study

Errors of sentence components in the study means the misuse of subject, object, predicate and complement. Compound errors in the study should be regarded as an attachment of adjective and noun to a common possessed or lack/surplus of possessor-possessed suffixes; verbal errors should be seen as the errors resulting from the misuse of affixes of verbal nouns, adjectives and adverbs; conjunctional and prepositional errors considered as the expression mistakes caused by miscomprehension of syntactic use of conjunctions and prepositions; expression mistakes as tense and personal morpheme inconsistency deriving from the inconsistency between mood and personal morphemes or inconsistency of personal morphemes between subject and predicate; disagreement of voice or a sentence error made because of the use of verbs in both active and passive voice or gerunds used in the same sentence. In addition, misuse of plural morpheme should be regarded as the expression mistakes resulting from syntactic question of plurality and singularity in a team of words, compounds and between subject and predicate (Akbayır 2007). The aim of this study is to determine expression errors of Turkic students speaking Turkish and find solutions to these errors.  

Research design

The present paper is a case study based on qualitative research method. A case study is an empirical research method where an up-to-date event is examined within its real life frame (content) and in which no certain limit is defined between the event and the content and which is used in situations where more than one data source or clue are reported (Yin, 1984). Since such an actual topic as the expression mistakes committed by Turkic students learning Turkish has been studied in real life frame and based on more than one data source, case study design was used. In addition, Creswell (2007, 73) regards case study as an approach where the researcher discovers one or a few limited systems using in detail the data collected from good and many sources at a time and reports the relevant themes describing the case. Therefore, since the data collected were defined from a holistic view, case study design was thought to fit best in our study.

Sample

In the study, one of the purposive sampling types, typical case sampling was used in accordance with qualitative research method. Typical case sampling is consulted generally to study an ordinary man, situation or phenomenon researched (Merriam, 2013). What is aimed indeed is to have general insight into a certain area studying the average cases or to inform those who do not possess enough information about a certain area, topic or application (Patton 2014, 236).

In the present study, the students studying at Turkish-English Department in one of the state universities in Kazakhstan were selected for typical case sampling. During selection of the students, their cumulative grade point average was taken into consideration and a pool of students satisfying the average success in the department was created. Then, students were selected from this pool. The sample consists of 10 female and 9 male students. Their average achievement level ranges from 2.80 to 3.22. 10 of the students are third graders while 9 are fourth year students.

Data collection

Two sources were consulted for the data of the study. First, the students were asked to get prepared to talk about any topic they wanted; then they talked about it in the classroom. Even in the case of asking questions to students, they were not interrupted. They expressed themselves freely on the topic selected. When they were speaking, their speeches were recorded by a camera with their permission.

The students were observed for one month in order to detect their expression mistakes. In participant observation, the researcher implicitely or explicitly observes their attitudes and behavior without depending on a pattern (Güler et al., 2013). In this study, the selected students in the sample were observed in different places and time for a given period of time. The data at the end of observation were recorded and consulted later. The observation conducted has two aims in the present study: First, enrichment of data for the study and secondly designation of validity and exactitude of the data collected from the students through speaking by means of variation. The observations conducted were appro-priate for both objectives.

Data analysis

Descriptive analysis was used to analyze the transcription of students’ speech recorded by a camera. Descriptive analysis is summarization and interpretation of the data according to the themes prepared before (Yıldırım and ÅžimÅŸek, 2011, 224). Expression mistakes of the students were classified and interpreted according the categories prior to the study. In case of expression mistakes classified into more than one category in a sentence, the sentence was put into all other categories. In correction of the sentences, the original ones were respected as much as possible and the syntax of the sentences was not much changed. Showing the sentences of incoherency in the tables, the first statement in parenthesis suggests students’ order number while the second one shows the time in minute and second when the students make mistake. Conducting descriptive analysis, we took into consideration the classifications of expression mistakes in the works of Aksoy (2008), Akbayır (2007), Eker (2003) and AktaÅŸ and Gündüz (2011).

In order to minimize margin of error during classification, two different codifications were consulted: one by the researcher in different times and the other by a specialist researcher and an expert in qualitative research. Then, the consistency ratio between the codes was calculated by using Miles and Huberman's (1994) formula (Reliability =Consensus/ Consensus+ dissidence) x 100. The consistency ratio for the codifications done by the researcher at different intervals was .93 while it was calculated as .90 in the codifications made by the specialist.

Table 1 shows the expression mistakes of Turkic students in grammar.  Almost half of the  totally  157  expression mistakes students made in grammar are related to sentence components. The students made errors most in compounds after sentence components and then the errors made using tense and personal morphemes with plural morphemes. The errors in the use of voice, conjunctions-prepositions and gerunds were relatively seen less.

Errors in sentence components are given in Table 2. Subject, complement, object and predicate errors made by the students in speaking were evaluated in this table. Turkic students make errors of components in grammar. All considered in itself, incoherency resulting from object errors comes in the first rank followed by complement and subject errors. Based on the examples, it can be concluded that the students neither used complements nor objects. Besides, they misused subjects and therefore gave way to uncertainties and did not make the objects explicit. 

The examples of compound errors are given in Table 3. Among the compound errors committed frequently by the students are, as seen in the examples, sometimes the use of wrong morpheme or sometimes non use of possessor or possessed morpheme, redundant use of possessor morpheme.

In Table 4, there is only one gerund/infinitive error example given. Aside from this example, the students did not make any other error of expression. As clearly seen in the example, gerund is misused in the verb “to marry”.

One of the expression mistakes in grammar is related to conjunctions and prepositions. It was found that the students had difficulty in using the preposition “ile (with)”, as given in Table 5. It can be argued that the students made less errors in conjunctions and prepositions compared to other errors in other sections of grammar. 

Expression mistakes resulting from tense-personal morphemes are given in Table 6. It was found that the errors were mostly due to the use of tense morphemes. The table suggests fewer errors due to personal morphemes.

In Table 7, examples are related to the inconsistency of voice. The errors were related to the use of passive voice. It is obvious that general expression mistakes considered, less errors due to the inconsistency of voice were reported.  

Lastly, among the common grammatical errors is the use of plural morphemes. In Table 8, it is seen that errors are due to redundant use of plural morphemes and subject-predicate inconsistency. Errors concerning the use of plural morpheme are quite common in speaking. 

Only one student out of 19 made this error. The error in misuse of gerund morpheme was found to be due to ignorance of where to use the morphemes. Both in the study of Yılmaz (2015) and that of Oksuz (2008), it was suggested that Turkic students had difficulty in using the morphemes. From this respect, the findings are similar to those in the relevant literature.

Another grammatical error that Turkic students make most in speaking Turkish is related to conjunction-preposition. Though not many errors were reported, only 5 students made these errors. Generally, the students had difficulty in using “ile (with)” preposition and instead of using “ile”, they had a tendency to use the dative case “-e”. This does not overlap the use in Kazakh. Oksuz (2011) found that Turkic people had difficulty in using conjunctions and prepositions.

Errors related to tense-personal morphemes are among the most common mistakes. Totally 11 errors were reported under this heading, most being in the use of tense morphemes rather than personal allomorphs. Such an error may be due to the fact that tenses in Kazakh are mostly different from those in Turkish. Oksuz (2011) stated Turkic students had problems in using tense morphemes.

Inconsistency of voice is another error frequently seen in grammar. Only three related errors were reported. All of these errors were related to the use of passive voice and the students make these errors though passive voice exists in both Kazakh and Turkish. It can be pointed out that only three errors related to the inconsistency of voice out of 157 errors may be due to the fact that the passive voice is constructed in the same way in both cognate languages.

The misuse of plural morpheme has also been reported to be among the most common expression mistakes. The students made 26 errors out of 157 in the use of plural morpheme. These errors are mostly due to the redundant use of plural morpheme and discordance of subject and predicate. That most of the students used redundant plural morphemes after plural forms of the words in compounds causes extra errors. This aspect may be due to the lack of practice in writing and speaking. In the study of Yılmaz (2015), the students acknowledged that they experienced problems because they lacked practice. The present findings are in parallel with the literature. 

All in all, it is obvious that Turkic students make grammatical mistakes mostly due to the lack of vocabulary and practice in speaking and writing. Not only Ozyurek (2009) and Açık (2008) but also Yılmaz (2015) obtained similar results in the literature. The speaking errors of Turkic students reported in the present study are mostly grammatical.

Suggestions

1. Since Turkic students experience difficulties in sentence components, more activities should be done regarding sentence construction.

2. For their errors in compounds, learning environments should be created for more practice and enhancement of vocabulary.

3. To be able to correct their mistakes related to gerund, tense and personal morphemes and the use of plural morphemes, activities and events should be realized; they should be encouraged to participate in mobility programs like Mevlana and Erasmus+.

4. They should live learning experiences based on the use of material and technology in order to eliminate the few errors related to conjunctions and prepositions. 

The authors have not declared any conflicts of interest.