THE EFFECT OF GOOGLE TRANSLATE TO ENHANCE THE STUDENTS' VOCABULARY MASTERY

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A.     Background

Langugage is one of the human primer  need in alive , because language is a tool to communicate among Human, Animal, and others things in the world. We can not communicate or interact with others in our daily life and in the media social networking  without language . Languages will be good when vocabulary is true.

Human language is unique and complex because it has to produce, practice, and must be trained to get a good communicate with others. So, the teacher must be creative to make the Students skills means their English skill such as speaking, writing, reading , and listening skill are good.

 In  mastering those skills, they must be supported by some elements of languages, they are pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary. It is impossible to master those skills  without  their suporting .

1

Learning English is very important, because English has become international language, even though in our country  it is still as a foreign language, but it is very important to master it  because many aspect  in our activity using English such as in business activity, technology operate, in tourism,  and the names of tehnology products. English is also called as the target language that has to be taught in schools in today’s Indonesian curriculum. Therefore the student are hoped to enhance their ability in English.

Teaching vocabulary is one of the key to enhance students English skill and it is also as a based element  to build students language skill.

Schmitt in Richardo Harbert (2013). noted, “learners carry around

dictionaries   and     not      grammar books. Teaching vocabulary helps

students understand and commpunicate with others in English. 

Students can not listen, read, speak and write well without possessing sufficient vocabulary. They can not establish their ability to communicate and convey their need as good as possible without having enought vocabulary.

The mastery of vocabulary is difficult task to do, because vocabulary is complex. This complexity brings difficulties to the students who try to master vocabulary. The difficulties may arise from the word itself and it is very hard to overcome. This probably caused by the word forms, various meaning, and word choices ( Kustaryo and Salombe. 1995:4).

Grounded on my obsrvation in the second grade of students SMA Darmayadi, they are very lack in vocabulary mastery. Realizing such diffculties, it is not enough for the English teacher to prepare students only word list and to memorize the words.  They are expected to provide students with rich and give exercise to help them to enhance their vocabulary. Therefore, teachers should find solution by creating efficient and effective techniques in teaching  vocabulary.

With the growth of the technology in the world, particulary in media social nerworking, there are many application or softwere such as mozilla firewox, google chrome, google, google translate, gmail, yahoo, and any others applications. And we can use all of them via online to help our activities. we have most potential to use it in our daily activities. For instance, to learn, to chat or to communicate with our friends, to get informations, to sell the products, and any others activities we can do.

From  the growth of the technology above, the researcher is going to use one of the applications as a methode  to help the students in the learning process of English, particulary in learning to master the English vocabulary. Actualy , There are, of course, many methodes or techniques which can help the students to enlarge and master the English vocabulary. One of them can be applied to help the students in mastering vocabulaary by google translation. This idea come from my experience to enhance my vocabulary.  Google translate is a free, multilingual statistical machine-translation service provided by Google Inc. to translate written text from one language into another (from  wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). And one of them is English to Indonesian and Indonesian to English. Google translation is unique because in Google translation (GT) has the sufficient to comprehend  the meaning of the words, to verbalize the word,  and the example of the using of the words. In Google translation we can explore the result of the meaning of the word to Book Prase and we can convert it to microsoft excel to make the list of the words.

The reseacher chooses Google translation because Google translation help and encourage many learners to sustain their interest and work. With Google translation student has a lot of fun and get rid off their tiresome during the lesson.

Google translation sufficient to comprehend or to know the meaning of the words and sentences. When the students find the unfamiliar words. they should see words surrounding the unfamiliar words.

 The Google translation is usefull in guiding the students to figure out the meaning of unfamiliar words or difficult words they find.

Realizing the fact above, the researcher conducted a research on “The Effect Of Google Translation to Enhance The Students’ Vocabulary Mastery in second grade of SMA Darmayadi Makassar.

B.   Problem statetment

Based on the description above, the researcher formulates research question  as follow :

“Can  Google translation enhance vocabulary mastering students in SMA Darmayadi Makassar?”

C.   The objective of the research

This reseach is intended to find out whether the effect of Google translation can enhance vocabulary mastering students in SMA Darmayadi Makassar .

D.   The significance of the research

This research is expected to be valuable information and contribution for the teaching and learning process. Google Translation is one of good technique in teaching and learning process. It is expected to be worthwhile information to improve teaching English vocabulary. Then for the English teacher, it is expected to give alternative contribution and information about the new method in teaching especially in teaching vocabulary for the Senior High School.

E.   Scope Of  The Research

This research is under the discipline of applied linguistics. This is restricted to teaching vocabulary by using Google Translation for the second year students of Sma Darmayadi. The kinds of vocabulary in this research are verbs, nouns, adjectives, In this research, the students would operate Google Translation to find out the unfamiliar words and write the words in their paper to create a short sentence.

F.    Definition of Term

The Researcher will clarify the terms used in the title to make this thesis easy to understand :

1.  Google Translate is a free translation service that provides instant translations between dozens of different languages. It can translate words, sentences and web pages between any combination of our supported languages. With Google Translate, we hope to make information universally accessible and useful, regardless of the language in which it is written.

2.  Mastery Learning refers to the idea that teaching should organize learning through ordered steps. In order to move to the next step, students have to master the prerequisite step. Mastery learning engages the learner in multiple instructional methods, learning levels and multiple cognitive thinking types. ( Davis & Sorrel ,1995).

CAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATUREA.   Previous R

elated Finding

Ahmadi, (2004:34) argued in his thesis that English vocabulary dialogue could improve the student’s vocabulary achievement. He found that, there are 4 students (16 %) get good score, 5 students ( 20%) get fairly good score, 1 students (4%) get fairly score, 11 students (44%) get poor score and 4 student (16 %) get very fairly score . The  English noun means score in pretest is (5,2) . and for the english  verb is categorized excellent. There is one student (4%) get excellent score, 7 students (28 %) get good score, 2 students (8%) get fairly good score, 12 students (48%) get fairly score and 3 students (42%) get poor score, the English verb means score in post-test is (6%).

7

Syamsinah, (2000:28) In her thesis “The Effectiveness Of  Context Clues In teaching Vocabulary To The Third Year Students “ She found that after giving treatment for four times, the students’ vocabulary for the experimental group was categorized as good. Because there were 9 (30%) were in very good, 19 (63,3%) were in good, and 2 (6,7%) were in fairly good. So, her concluded the students’ improved during the treatment. The mean scores of post test of the experimental group is higher (8,38) then the control group (7,11). It means that the experimental group which was treated by using context clues got better result than those who were not.

McCarten in © Cambridge University Press (2007) found that Despite such difficulties, researchers have tried to estimate how many words  native  speakers  know  in  order  to  assess  the  number  of  words  learners need to learn. Estimates for native speakers vary between 12,000 and 20,000 depending  on  their  level  of  education.  One  estimate  is  that  a  native  speaker university graduate knows about 20,000 word families (Goulden, Nation, and Read, 1990), not including phrases and expressions. Current learners’ diction-Aries such as the  Cambridge Dictionary of American English include “more than 40,000  frequently  used  words  and  phrases. This  huge  number  of  items presents a challenge that would be impossible for most English language learn-ers, and even for many native speakers.

1.    Definition  of vocabulary.

   Vocabulary is one of the most important thing in languages. It is a basis necessary for the students  who want to study English.

Where, vocabulary is the important role in learning of language.

In order to give a clear explanation about vocabulary there are some of definition according to master of English :

Graves and Taylor in Murkolori (2011) defined that  vocabulary as the entire stock of words belonging to a branch of knowledge or known by an individual. He also states that the lexicon of a language is its vocabulary, which includes words and expressions. While, Miller in Murkolori ( 2011) stated that vocabulary is a set of words that are the basic building blocks used in the generation and understanding  of sentences.

Vocabulary is a component of language  that maintains of all information about meaning and using word in language. (Harimurti in Kasim ( 2006 :4 ). While, Nuraeni Kasim in her proposal state that vocabulary is a fundamental requirement  that influence students’ achievement in studying English . without vocabulary  there is no communicate, read, and write can be conveyed.

Ko ( 2011 ) noted that vocabulary is “A list or collection of words usually alphabetically arranged and explained or lexicon, stock of words use in language or by class, individual, etc.” While , Roget 2010), Vocabulary is:

·           An  alphabetical  list  of  words  often  defined  or  translated,  the  vocabulary includes idioms and two words verb.

·           All the word of Language.

·           Specialized expression indigenous to a particular fields, subject, trade or subculture.

From the definitions above the writer find a conclusion that vocabulary is  a list  or collection of  words alphabetically  and phrases that very important role in language which have the meaning and complex and  it is must continuously to study by people .

2.    Types Of Vocabulary

Vocabulary is a list of word that the students have to use for expressing  ideas, thinking to communicate each other. Each individuals’ vocabulary may be categorized as four components namely listening, reading, speaking, and writing. These components indicate how vocabulary is processed and how it is used.

Each of us has a receptive  and productive vocabulary. As figure out bellow:

Process	Oral	Writing
Receptive	Listening	Reading
Productive	Speaking	Writing

The figure indicates that receive vocabulary through auditory  ( listening) and visual ( reading ). We generate or produce language both orally ( speaking ) and through the medium or printed ( writing) . we usually either know the meaning of a word or we do not know, regardless or weather we hear it, speak it, write it, then we probably know and understand (listening and reading ) more  words then we use in our writing and speaking ( simith and jonson in Syamsinah, 2000: 7).

Harmer in Syamsinah (2000 :7) pointed out two types of vocabulary namely active vocabulary and passive vocabulary. Active vocabulary refers to vocabulary which has been learned by students. They are expected to be able to use it. And passive vocabulary refers to words which students will recognized when they meet them, but will not probably able to use or produce them. While Montgomery ( 2007 ) in his book showed that there are 4 types of vocabulary:

□  Listening  □  Speaking  □  Reading    Writing

Listening Vocabulary refers to The words we hear and  understand. Starting in the womb, fetuses can detect sounds as early as 16 weeks.  Furthermore, babies are listening during all their waking hours –   and we continue to learn new words this way all of our lives.  By the time we reach adulthood, most of us will recognize and understand close to 50,000 words.

Speaking Vocabulary refers to The words we understand when we read text.  We can read and understand many words that we do not use in our speaking vocabulary.  The words we use when we speak. Our speaking vocabulary is relatively limited:  Most adults use a mere 5,000 to 10,000 words  for all their conversations and instructions.  

This number is much less than our listening vocabulary most likely due to ease of use.

Reading Vocabulary refers to The words we understand when we read text.  We can read and understand many words that we do not use in our speaking vocabulary. 

Writing Vocabulary refers to The words we can retrieve when we write to express ourselves.  We generally find it easier to explain ourselves orally, using facial expression and intonation to help get our ideas across, then to find just the right words to communicate the same ideas in writing.  Our writing vocabulary is strongly influenced by the words we can spell.

3.       Principle of teaching vocabulary

Concerning with the principles of teaching and learning vocabulary, Ismail & Wallace in Syamsinah (2000: 8) indicate as follows :

a.      Aims

In teaching vocabulary we should make clear our aims. They should be clearly settled about how many words that learners are able to know or to master.

b.      Quantity

Ensure a number of vocabulary that have  been given to the students and should decide how many words will be taught and how many words should be active  vocabulary and still as passive vocabulary should be familliar with them.

c.      Need

In this case, the teacher in choosing the vocabulary that are going to be taught will be related to the aims of the students’ course and based on their knowledge discipline.

d.      Frequent exposure and repetition

A certain amount of repetition is necessary until there is a proof that the students have learned the large words. The simple way to checking that the learning has been done by seeing weather the students have to be a part of the students productive vocabulary, they must be given  an opportunity to use them as often as necessary for them to recall the words at all with the correct spelling and pronunciation and identify their meaning.

e.    Meaningful presentation

In presenting the words, the student must be clear and specific understanding of what words presented in such a way their presentation and reference are perfect and unambiguous.

f.    Presenting in a context

Words are seldom occur in isolation. So it is important for the students to know the usual collocation that words occur so from the beginning. The words appear in its natural environment as it was among the words in normally collocates with.

g.  Situation of presentation

The words presentation is appropriate to the students presentation.

h.   Guessing procedures in vocabulary learning.

Guessing is one of way of learning vocabulary. Guessing leads students to think the meaning of the new words by learning them in a certain situation, sometimes by reading  them in a certain context.

Paul Nation in (ASIAN EFL JOURNAL ) states six principle or way to quickly giving attention to words :

·               Keep the teaching simple and clear.  Don’t give complicated explanations.

·                Relate the present teaching to past knowledge by showing a pattern or analogies.

·                Use both oral and written presentation - write it on the  blackboard as well as explaining.

·                Give most attention to words that are already partly known.

·                Tell the learners if it is a high frequency word that is worth noting for future attention.

·               Don’t bring in other unknown or poorly known related words like near synonyms, opposites, or members of the same lexical set.

4.         Vocabulary selection ( words )

The teaching of vocabulary is an important part of a language and it must be done carefully. The English teacher should know words are important to learn because many words will not be useful for students. Useful words are the words that are occur frequently in everyday English.

To select the important vocabulary means that we choose that actual words that can be used by the students. In this case, before teaching vocabulary, the teacher should select the students vocabulary need.

The aims of vocabulary selection is to remedy or words or to make the learning process a more efficient one (Wilkins in Syamsinah (2000:11) Before selection, the teacher should determine the criteria of selection words. Bader in Haerunnufudz (1998:13) states that the teacher can use the following criteria of selection words for studying. They are:

Ø   Those with high utility in daily life

Ø   Those of necessary  for comprehension in specific area of interest to the students or needed by the students.

From the theory above, we can associate that the students’ vocabulary need means the personal need, social need, thinking need , and labeling need.

a.        Personal need

It means that the students need a language for communicating, understanding English text, sharing information, sending a letter, etc.

b.        Social need

It means the students need a language for communicating with other people where the students live such as work together in a group discussing and talking a speech, etc.

c.         Thinking need

It means that the students need a language for expressing their ideas, solving problem , and speaking, etc.

d.        Labeling  need

It means that the students need a language for referring to a person, place , thing, etc.

B.  Definition Of Google Translate

Talking about Google Translate is to tell about media social networking which almost every people used it to translate or to understand about the meaning of the words and sentences by online. Many people in the round of world knows it. This is a social media which used by people who want to understand about the meaning of words and sentences from a language to another languages and one of them is Indonesian to English or from English to Indonesian.

In order to clear concept of Google  Translate,  firstly we have better to know what is Google translate or translation is.

1.         What is Google Translate

Google Translate is  a free translation service that provides instant translations between dozens of different languages. It can translate words, sentences and web pages between any  combination of our supported languages. With Google Translate, we hope to make information universally accessible and useful, regardless of the language in which it’s.(Robert Quigley, 2010) . And Google translate is a free multilingual statistical machine – translation service provided by Google.Inc. to translate written text

  from one language into another language.

2.         How Google translate work

When Google Translate generates a translation, it looks for patterns in hundreds of millions of document to help decide on the best translation for you. Detecting patterns in documents that have already been translated by translators, Google translate can make intelligent guesses as to what on appropriate translation should be. This process of seeking patterns in large amount of text is called “ statistical machine translation”. Since the translation are generated by machines, not all translation will be perfect. The more human translated documents that Google translate can analyse in specific language, the better the translation quality will be.

Robert Quigley (2010) states that Google Tranlation is by no means a perfect translation service, you are still going to have to invest in those language classes if you want to able to fluently communicate  with speakers of foreign tongues – but if you remember the online wasteland that preceded it, you will know it’s pretty darn good at conveying the gist of what you are traying to express.

3.         Using  Google Translate To teach Engliah

Google Translate  is one of great  technique and interest to use in learning in  classroom, because it is  a free online translation tools available to use by teacher and students in teaching and learning process. Students  can access this tool to find out what their need. For instance : The students want to find the synonym of the words and to know the using of the words. etc.

Bear states that there are  several Google Translate offer :

a.        Translation

b.        Translate search

c.         Translator toolkit

d.        Tools and resources

But here, He just explain about Google Translate as a translation tool and google translate as a translated search.

1.            Google Translate  : translation

This is the most traditional tool. Enter text or any URL and Google translate will provides translation in 52 languages, so you shall probably find what you need. Google Translate translations are not perfect, but they are getting better all the time ( more about this later).

v   Ways to use Google Translate – translation in class

o      Have students write short texts in English, and translate them in to their original language. Using google translate for translation can help students catch grammatical errors by spotting  these errors in the translation.

o      Use authentic resources, but provide the URL and have students translate the original into their target language. This will help out when it comes to difficult vocabulary.

o      Make sure that students use Google Translate only after they have first read the article in english.

o      For beginners, ask students to first write short texts in their mother tongue. Have them translate into english and ask them to tweak translation.

o      Provide your own short text and let google translate into class’ target language(s). Ask students to read the translation and then try to come up with the English original text.

o      If all else fails, use google translate as a bilingual dictionary.

2.            Google Translate : translated search

Google Translate also provides a translated search function. This tool is extremely powerful for finding accompanying content to help students take advantage of authentic materials in English. Google Translate provides this translated search as a way to find pages written in another language that focus on the search term you provided in English. In other words, if we're working on business presentation styles, using Google Translate translated search I can provide some background materials in Spanish or any other language.

v   Ways to use google translate – translated search in class

o      When stuck on a grammar point, search on the grammar term to provide explanations in learners' mother tongue(s).

o      Use as a means to provide context in learners' mother tongue(s). This is especially useful if students aren't familiar with the topic area. They can become familiar with some of the ideas in their own language as well as in English to help strengthen the learning experience.

o      Use translated search to find pages on a particular topic. Cut and paste a few paragraphs out, have students then translate the text into English.

o      Google Translate translated search is fantastic for group projects. Often you'll find students don't have ideas, or are not sure where to begin. Sometimes, this is due to the fact that they aren't too familiar with the subject in English. Let them use translated search to get them started.

4.        

INPUT:  Prior knowledge

PROCESS: Teaching and learning vocabulary  using  the Google Translation.

OUTPUT:  Students’ vocabulary mastery.

Conceptual   Framework of the research

The figur above is noted as follow :                                            

Input                 :  It refers to the students prior knowledge

Process            : It refers to the teaching and learning vocabulary using google    translation is the main method in this research.

Output           : It refers to the students’ vocabulary mastery after giving treatment.

5.            Hypothesis

The hypothesis of this research is formulated as follows :

1.         Null hypothesis (H₀): There is no effect of google translation toward the enhance of the students’ vocabulary mastery.

2.         Alternative Hypothesis (H₁) : There is effect of google translation toward the enhance of students’ vocabulary mastery.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY OF RESEARCH

A.   Research methods and design

The method  will apply in this research is quasi experimental method. where, the participants who take in this study are two classes they are control class and experimental class.

23

A quasi-experimental study is a type of evaluation which aims to determine whether a program or intervention has the intended effect on a study’s participants. The general goal of quasi experimental research is to investigate cause and effect relationships. This approach to research allows for greater understanding of program features and practices. Because there is a loss of control in the quasi experimental design, it is necessary for the researcher to decide what and when to measure (Dawson, 1997). What follows is a sample outline of designs. An X represents the group being exposed to a treatment or intervention. An O represents an observation or measurement. Temporal order of events is designated from left to right. The dotted line in each design is an indication of the lack of random assignment of subjects to the groups .

To clear about the explanation of  quasi experiment above the researcher write in the Nonequivalent control – group design  bellow ;

E         = 01    X         02

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

C         = 01                02

The most common quasi experimental design is the Nonequivalent Control-Group Design, illustrated above. The design includes at least an experimental and control group. It mirrors the Pretest-Post test control group experimental design, but instead of randomization, naturally occurring comparison groups are selected to be as alike as possible (Gribbons & Herman in  Bradley, 2009 ).

The design above will presents as follow :

Where : E      = Experimental group

C       = Control group

01      = pretest

02      = post test

X        = treatment

B.   Variable Of The Research

In this research there were two variable namely : Independent and Dependent variable. Where Independent variable is using google translate to enhance of students vocabulary mastering. While Dependent variable is enhance the students vocabulary mastering .

C.   Population and Sample

1.    Population

The populations of this research was the second year students of SMA Darmayadi Makassar the academic year 2014/2015. The second year students consisted of two class. The total number of them are 46 students.

2.    Sample

The sample of this research was the second years students that consists of the Experiment Class was XI A there are 24 students and Control Class was Class XI B with 22 students of SMA Darmayadi Makassar. The total numbers of students as a sample in this research are 46 students.

D.   Instrument of The Research

In this research  the researcher had used test as the instrument of collecting data. This test consist of 10 items. They comprise of multiple choice , completion, matching. Their score is 10 for each item.

E.   Procedure  of Collecting Data

The procedure of collecting data was chronologically be performed as follows :

a.     Pretest

The pretest administrating before doing the treatment. It is to find out the students English skill ( vocabulary mastery) to both the experimental group and the control group.

b.     Treatment

In this research the writer given the treatment after pre test. But, the first time the writer decides which class of experimental group and control group. The experimental group would be treated by means of the technique of teaching vocabulary through Google Translation and the control group is treated by giving the usual treatment. And the procedure would apply in this research is like as follows :

1.    The researcher prepared some media which support relate the technique such as: laptop, projector (LCD), modem,and speaker .

2.    The researcher connected them.

3.    The  researcher prepared the text or sentences in a piece of paper or find the article in Google search.

4.    The researcher divided the students in to five groups

5.    The researcher distributed the paper out of students. 

6.     The researcher asked the students to read the text or sentences   carefully for 15 minutes together mean with their friends in a team.

7.    The researcher asked them to find out the unfamiliar words.

8.    The researcher explain to the students how to use or how to find out the meaning of the unfamiliar words, and the example of using the words and the spelling of the words by google translate.

9.    The researcher asked the students to find out the meaning of the unfamiliar words, the example of using the words and the spelling the words  by google translate.

10. The researcher asked the students to write  the list and the meaning of the words in their work sheet as a proof that they have done.

11. The researcher taken the students work sheet as a material for evaluation in the post test.

c.      Post test

After treating the students, both groups are giving the post test. The result of their test would be compared by using T- test to see which of the two ways of teaching is more effective by seeing the students scores.

F.    Technique of Data Analysis

The data collected through the test and questionnaire will be analysed by using the formula as follow :

1.    Scoring the students’ test score

Score =

2.     Classifying the score of the test are classified in to seven levels as follows :

Ø  96 – 100 is classified as excellent

Ø  86 – 95 is classified as very good

Ø  76 – 85 is classified as good

Ø  66 – 75 is classified as fairly good

Ø  56 – 65 is classified as fair

Ø  36 – 55 is classified as poor

Ø  0 – 35 is classified as very poor.

( Depdikbud, 1985 :6 )

3.    The mean score of the students answer :

Where            :  = Mean score

             

            N = Total number of sample

                                    ( Gay , 1981 )

4.    Calculating the means scores of students’ test by SPSS system.

5.    Gain test

This test aimed to know the effect of google translate in enhanced of students vocabulary mastery. The data will be analyzed using by the formula as follow.

Interpretation

G < 0,30                     = Low

0,30≤ g < 0,70           = Medium

G ≥ 0,70                     = Hight

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter covers the findings of the research and the discussion of the findings.

In this research the researcher had collected the data by test. The test of this research have been conducted in two times. The first test was given to the students in pre test of experimental class and control class. Where, the students were given some numbers of questions to be answered. The total number of questions were 10 questions . where 5 questions are multiple choice and the others are essay test. It is aimed to find out the students prior knowledge, means the students’ vocabulary mastery. The explanations of the findings in this research the researcher presented by the following table.

A.  Findings

a.    Data Pre Test Of Experiment And Control Group

1. Students Score In Pre Test Of Experiment Group.

The table below shows the students score in pre test for experiment group and the classification of the students scores.

30

 

Table 4.1: The students score in pre test for experiment group.

No.	Name	Experiment Group	Classification
1	Florentina Suhartini	55	Poor
2	Endang Estona	68	Fairly good
3	Fulgensius Jaheng	50	Poor
4	Yasinta Jelita	50	Poor
5	Rizal . A	35	Very poor
6	Hasniati	40	Poor
7	Pebria Fera	63	Fair
8	Kornelia M.D Eli	50	Poor
9	Novianti	55	Poor
10	Wihelmina Eldiana Ice	60	Fair
11	Ahmadi M	50	Poor
12	Wiwik Ertina	45	Poor
13	Ayu Lestari Ruslan	54	Poor
14	Mertiana Santi	35	Very poor
15	Martiana Urbanus	46	Poor
16	Susana Leni	56	Fair
17	Margareta Da Costa	60	Fair
18	Murnati Sule	55	Poor
19	Meitisa Audina M	65	Fair
20	Gustiana Bura	45	Poor
21	Kornelius Kasman	55	Poor
22	Ferdianus Kintong	40	Poor
23	Asno Nokot	60	Fair
24	Ariz Bele	45	Poor

From the table above, it shows that none of them was classified   into excellent, very good and good. Where, 15 students were in poor classification, 6 students were in fair classification, 2 were in very poor classification and 1 student got fairly good classification.

The researcher can put the students’ classification into the rate percentage. It is shown by the following table.

                                                            Table 4.2

Classification, Frequency and rate percentage of the students Pretest of experiment group

No	Classification	Range	Frequency	Percentage
1	Excellent	96 – 100	0	0%
2	Very good	86 – 95	0	0%
3	Good	76 – 85	0	0 %
4	Fairly good	66 – 75	1	4,17%
5	Fair	56 – 65	6	25%
6	Poor	36 – 55	15	62,5 %
7	Very poor	0 – 35	2	8,33 %
	Total		24	100%

Table 4.2 above illustrates the rate percentage and frequency of the students pre-test that 15 (65,5%) students got poor score, 6 (25%) students got fair score, 1 (4,17%) students got fairly good score, 2 (8,33 %) students got very poor score, no one students got excellent, very good and good score.

2.  Students Score In Pre Test Of Control Group.

The table below shows the students’ score in pre test for control  group and the classification of the students scores.

Table 4.3 The students scores in pre test for control gorup.

No.	Name	Control Group	Classification
1	Neti Ratu	46	Poor
2	Hartika	55	Poor
3	Abimahyu H.W	36	Poor
4	Oktavianus Mahis	30	very poor
5	Wili Baldus	65	Fair
6	Quinrinus Cerdas	50	Poor
7	Arman	45	Poor
8	Oktavianus Mahis	30	very poor
9	Edar	58	Fair
10	Kadir	70	fairly good
11	Sharul	45	Poor
12	Abd. Kasim	50	Poor
13	Irma	45	Poor
14	Sidar	55	Poor
15	Aris Santos	60	Fair
16	Wili Baldus	65	Fair
17	Wahyuni	60	Fair
18	Akbar	65	Fair
19	Febrian N	55	Poor
20	Firman	40	Poor
21	Feri Ladu	65	Fair
22	Regina Jus	45	Poor

From the table (4.3) above, it shows that none of them was classified   into excellent, very good and good. Where, 12 students were in poor classification, 7 students were in fair classification, 2 were in very poor clasification and 1 was in fairly good classification.

The researcher can put the students’ classification into the rate percentage. It is shown by the following table.

Table 4.4

Classification, Frequency and rate percentage of the students Pretest of Control group

No	Classification	Range	Frequency	Percentage
1	Excellent	96 – 100	0	0%
2	Very good	86 – 95	0	0%
3	Good	76 – 85	0	0 %
4	Fairly good	66 – 75	1	4,5%
5	Fair	56 – 65	7	32%
6	Poor	36 – 55	12	54,5 %
7	Very poor	0 – 35	2	9 %
	Total		22	100%

          Table 4.4 above illustrates the rate percentage and frequency of the students pre-test of control group that 12 (54,5%) students got poor score, 7 (32%) students got fair score, 1 (4,5%) students got fairly good score, 2 (9%) students got very poor score, no one students got excellent, very good and good score.

3.     Analysis Data PreTest

a.     The calculating mean score  of the students’ pre test for experiment group and control group.

Experiment group (x1)          x1 = ∑x1                                                      n                                                              = 1237                                             24                                                x1 = 51,54

Control group (x2)  x2 = ∑x1          n     = 1135          22 x2 = 51,59

Based of the calculating above The mean score of experiment group  was 51,54 and the control group  was 51,59. it means that the students’ score in pretest  for both group were categorized as poor classification.

b.    Statistics of Pre Test For Experiment and Control Group$

The table below is statistic descriptive table, it shows the result of pretest  in experiment and control group .

Table 4.5 Statistics Descriptive Data Pre Test
		Experiment Group	Control Group
N	Valid	24	22
	Missing	0	2
Mean		51.54	51.59
Median		52.00	52.50
Mode		50a	45a
Std. Deviation		8.978	11.537
Variance		80.607	133.110
Range		33	40
Minimum		35	30
Maximum		68	70
Sum		1237	1135
Remarks : a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown.

Based on the table (4.5) above, shown that the mean score of experiment group was 51,54 and control group was 51.59.  and the median score of experiment  group was 52,54 while in control group was 52,59 . and the Mode of experimental and control group  was 50 and  45. The standard deviation of experiment was 8,978 and control group was 11,537, and variance of experiment and control  was 80,607 and 133,110, and the range of experiment group was 33 and control group was 40, and the minimum score of experiment group was 35 and control group was 30, and the maximum score of experiment group was 68 while control group was 70, so the sum of experiment group was 1237 while in control group was 1135.

c.      Test of Normality for data Experiment and Control Group For pre test.

The table  below  shows the data of pre test for experiment and control group whether both normaly or not. Normaly here means that the data was distributed by normaly.

Table 4.6        Tests of Normality
Group	Kolmogorov-Smirnova			Shapiro-Wilk
	Statistic	Df	Sig.	Statistic	Df	Sig.
Pretest Experiment	.118	22	.200*	.968	22	.670
Pretest Control	.116	22	.200*	.950	22	.318
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

Because the total sample 48  ≤ 50, then the table was  seen is  Shapiro-Wilk table.

The data had been a normal distribution if p / sig ≥ 0.05 and the results of the analysis showed the probability value 0.670 and 0.318. where both of these values ​​is greater than α = 0.05, then the data can be interpreted both in normal distribution.

d.  Test of Homogeneity for data Experiment and Control Group For pretest.

The table  below  shows the data of pretest for experiment and control group whether both homogen or not.

Table 4.7 Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Pretest velue
Levene Statistic	df1	df2	Sig.
1.978	1	44	.167

The data said homogen if p / sig ≥ 0.05 and the results of the analysis showed the probability value 0.167. where both of these values ​​is greater than α = 0.05, then the data can be interpreted both in homogen  distribution.

e.    T - Test for  data pre test

                                                                         SS₁ = 8,978                                 

                                                                                 SS₂ = 11,537                       

1.      t-test                                                     

t =                                         

t =                           

t =                                           

t =                                            

t =                                                                                                                                                                       

t-_test = _­ 1,25    

Because  the result of T_test was not in list T_table value, so the researcher using the  interpolation formula to get T_table value.

T (0,95) (40) = 1,68               (0,95) (44) = 1,68 –  (1,68 - 1,67)

                                                                     = 1,68 -  ( 0.01)

T (0,95) (60) = 1,67                                   = 1,68 – 0.002

= 1.678

Criteria:

T_test > T_table H₀  = accepted

1,25 < 1,678 = H₀ was accepted and H₁ = rejected

Conclusion:

 (H₀): There is no effect of Google Translation toward the enhance of the students’ vocabulary mastery.

b.    Data Post Test of Experiment and Control Group

1.    Students Score In post Test Of Experiment Group.

The table below shows the students score in post test for experiment group and the classification of the students scores.

Table 4.8: The students score in post test for experiment group.

No	Name	Score	Classification
1	Florentina Suhartini	85	Good
2	Endang Estona	72	Fairly Good
3	Fulgensius Jaheng	90	Very Good
4	Yasinta Jelita	79	Good
5	Rizal . A	80	Good
6	Hasniati	75	Fairly Good
7	Pebria Fera	86	Very Good
8	Kornelia M.D Eli	82	Good
9	Novianti	64	Fair
10	Wihelmina Eldiana Ice	85	Good
11	Ahmadi . M	84	Good
12	Wiwik Ertina	82	Good
13	Ayu Lestari Ruslan	83	Good
14	Mertiana Santi	78	Good
15	Mertiana Urbanus	87	Very Good
16	Susana Leni	87	Very Good
17	Margaretha Da Costa	84	Good
18	Murnati Sule	82	Good
19	Meitisa Audina .M	93	Very Good
20	Gustiana Bura	75	Fairly Good
21	Kornelius Kasman	77	Fairly Good
22	Ferdianus Kintong	65	Fair
23	Asno Nokot	80	Good
24	Ariz Bele	75	Fair

From the table ( 4.8 ) above, shows that none of them was classified   into Poor and very Poor , Where, 5 students were in very good classification, 12 students were in good classification, 4 fairly good classification and 3 in fair classification.

The researcher can put the students’ classification into the rate percentage. It is shown by the following table.

Table 4.9

Classification, Frequency and rate percentage of the students Post test of experiment group

No	Classification	Range	Frequency	Percentage
1	Excellent	96 – 100	0	0%
2	Very good	86 – 95	5	21 %
3	Good	76 – 85	12	50 %
4	Fairly good	66 – 75	4	16,7 %
5	Fair	56 – 65	3	12,5 %
6	Poor	36 – 55	0	0 %
7	Very poor	0 – 35	0	0 %
	Total		24	100%

          Table 4.2 above illustrates the rate percentage and frequency of the students post-test that 5 (21 %) students got very good score, 12 (50 %) students got good score, 4 (16,7%) students got fairly good score,3 (12,5 %) students got fair score, no one students got poor, very poor and excellent score.

2.    Students Score  of Post Test  for Control Group.

The table below shows the students’ score in post test for control  group and the classification of the students scores.

Table 4.10 The students scores in post test for control gorup.

No	Name	Score	Classification
1	Neti Ratu	47	Poor
2	Hartika	85	Good
3	Abimahyu H. W	60	Fair
4	Oktavianus Mahis	55	Poor
5	Wili Baldus	65	Fair
6	Quinrinus Cerdas	64	Fair
7	Arman	47	Poor
8	Oktavianus Mahis	40	Very Poor
9	Edar	60	Fair
10	Kadir	70	Fairly good
11	Sharul	50	Poor
12	Abd. Kasim	55	Poor
13	Irma	50	Poor
14	Sidar	70	Fairly good
15	Aris Santos	60	Fair
16	Wili Baldus	65	Fair
17	Wahyuni	60	Fair
18	Akbar	65	Fair
19	Febrian N	60	Fair
20	Firman	45	Very Poor
21	Feri Ladu	75	Fairly good
22	Regina Jus	50	Poor

The table (4.10) above, shows that none of them was classified   into excellent and very good . Where, 1 student was in good classification, 3 students were in fairly good classification, 9 were in fair classification, 7 were in poor classification, 2 were in very poor classification.

The researcher can put the students’ classification into the rate percentage. It is shown by the following table.

Table 4.11

Classification, Frequency and rate percentage of the students Post test of control group

No	Classification	Range	Frequency	Percentage
1	Excellent	96 – 100	0	0%
2	Very good	86 – 95	0	0%
3	Good	76 – 85	1	4,5 %
4	Fairly good	66 – 75	3	13,5%
5	Fair	56 – 65	9	41%
6	Poor	36 – 55	7	31,8 %
7	Very poor	0 – 35	2	9 %
	Total		22	100%

Table 4.11 above illustrates the rate percentage and frequency of the students post-test of control group that 1 (4,5%) students got  good score,3 students were in fairly good , 9 (41 %) students got fair score, 7 (31,8 %) students got poor score, 2 (9 %) students got very poor score, no one students got excellent, very good and good score.

3.  Analysis Data post Test

a.    The calculating mean score  of the students’ pre test for experiment group and control group.

Experiment group (x1)          x1 = ∑x1                                                      n                                                              = 1930                                             24                                                x1 = 80,42

Control group (x2)  x2 = ∑x1          n     = 1298          22 x2 = 59

Based of the calculating above The mean score of experiment group  was 80,42 and control group  was 59. It means that the students’ score in post test of experiment group was greater than control group  and it was categorized as good classification.

b.    Statistics of Post Test For Experiment and Control Group

The table below is statistic descriptive table, it shows the result of post test  in experiment and control group .

Table 4.12 Statistics Descriptive Data Post Test Post test Experiment Post test Control N Valid 24 22 Missing 0 2 Mean 80.42 59.00 Median 82.00 60.00 Mode 75a 60 Std. Deviation 7.027 10.761 Variance 49.384 115.810 Range 29 45 Minimum 64 40 Maximum 93 85 Sum 1930 1298 a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown

Based on the table (4.5) above, shown that the mean score of experiment group was 80,42 and control group was 59.00.  and the median score of experiment  group was 82,00 while in control group was 60,00 . and the Mode of experimental and control group  were 75 and  60, and the standard deviation of experiment was 7,027 and control group was 10,761, and variance of experiment and control  was 49,384 and 115,810, and the range of experiment group was 29 and control group was 45, and the minimum score of experiment group was 64 and control group was 40, and the maximum score of experiment group was 93 while control group was 85, so the sum of experiment group was 1930 while in control group was 1298. From the table above the result of both group has difference. So the reseacher can concluded that the students which given the treatment by google translation got better then the students witout given the treatment by Google Tranlate.

c.    Test of Normality for  data Experiment and Control Group for post test.

Table : (4.6)  The table  below  shows the data of post test for experiment and control group whether both normaly or not. Normaly here Means that the data was distributed by normaly.

Table 4. 13 Tests of Normality
	Kolmogorov-Smirnova			Shapiro-Wilk
	Statistic	df	Sig.	Statistic	df	Sig.
Posttest Experiment	.163	22	.133	.942	22	.213
Posttest Control	.128	22	.200*	.970	22	.713
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

Because the total sample 48  ≤ 50, then the table was  seen is  Shapiro-Wilk table.

The data had been a normal distribution if p / sig ≥ 0.05 and the results of the analysis showed the probability value 0.213 and 0.713. where both of these values ​​was greater than α = 0.05, then the data can be interpreted both in normal distribution.

d.    Test of Homogenety for data Experiment and Control Group

For post test.

The table  below  shows the data of pre test for experiment and control group whether both homogen or not.

Table. 4.14 Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Post Test Velue
Levene Statistic	df1	df2	Sig.
3.366	1	44	0.073

The data said homogen if p / sig ≥ 0.05 and the results of the analysis showed the probability value 0.073. where both of these values ​​is greater than α = 0.05, then the data can be interpreted both in homogen distribution.

e.    T – TEST Of Data Post Test

                                                             SS₁ = 7,027                                

                                                              SS₂ = 10,761                       

2.      t-test                                                     

t =                                         

t =                           

t =                                           

t =                                            

t =                                                                                                                                                                       

t-_test = _­ 612   

Because  the result of T_test was not in list T_table value, so the researcher using the  interpolation formula to get T_table value.

T (0,95) (40) = 1,68               (0,95) (44) = 1,68 –  (1,68 - 1,67)

                                                                     = 1,68 -  ( 0.01)

T (0,95) (60) = 1,67                                   = 1,68 – 0.002

= 1.678

Criteria:

T_test > T_table H₁  = accepted

612 > 1,678 = H₁ was accepted and H₀ = rejected

The table below was presented the result of T-test and T-table .

Table : Students’ T-test and T –table.

Group	T –test	T - table
Experiment & Control	612	1,678

Based on the table above that the t-test was higher than t-table. where the t-test was 612 while the t-table 1,678. It means that there was significant different of the  students’ result in pre test and post test.

Conclusion:

 (H₁): There was effect of Google Translation toward the enhance of students’ vocabulary mastery.

f.     Analysis Data Index Gain

Gain is the Increase of students score which obtained from the difference between pretest and posttest. Test of gain done to determine the effectiveness of the method that used in learning process.

Interpretation

If   G < 0,30                = low

0,30 ≤ G = < 0,70      = medium

G ≥ 0,70                     = High

1.  Control Group

Table 4. 15 Students Gain In Control Group

No	Name	Pretest	Posttest	Gain	Classification
1	Neti Ratu	46	47	0,02	Low
2	Hartika	55	85	0,67	Medium
3	Abimahyu H. W	36	60	0,38	Medium
4	Oktavianus Mahis	30	55	0,36	Medium
5	Wili Baldus	65	65	0,00	Low
6	Quinrinus Cerdas	50	64	0,28	Low
7	Arman	45	47	0,04	Low
8	Oktavianus Mahis	30	40	0,14	Low
9	Edar	58	60	0,05	Low
10	Kadir	70	70	0,00	Low
11	Sharul	45	50	0,09	Low
12	Abd. Kasim	50	55	0,10	Low
13	Irma	45	50	0,09	Low
14	Sidar	55	70	0,33	Medium
15	Aris Santos	60	60	0,00	Low
16	Wili Baldus	65	65	0,00	Low
17	Wahyuni	60	60	0,00	Low
18	Akbar	65	65	0,00	Low
19	Febrian N	55	60	0,11	Low
20	Firman	40	45	0,08	Low
21	Feri Ladu	65	75	0,29	Low
22	Regina Jus	45	50	0,09	Low
TOTAL OF GAIN			3,11

Based on the table above the students gain was 3,11. It means there is had a little enhance on vocabulary mastery.

2.     Experiment

Table 4.17 Students Gain In Experiment Group.

Experiment Class
No.	Name	Pre Test	Post Test	Gain	Classification
1	Florentina Suhartini	55	85	0,67	Medium
2	Endang Estona	68	72	0,13	Low
3	Fulgensius Jaheng	50	90	0,80	High
4	Yasinta Jelita	50	79	0,58	Medium
5	Rizal . A	35	80	0,69	Medium
6	Hasniati	40	75	0,58	Medium
7	Pebria Fera	63	86	0,62	Medium
8	Kornelia M.D Eli	50	82	0,64	Medium
9	Novianti	55	64	0,20	Low
10	Wihelmina Eldiana Ice	60	85	0,63	Medium
11	Ahmadi . M	50	84	0,68	Medium
12	Wiwik Ertina	45	82	0,67	Medium
13	Ayu Lestari Ruslan	54	83	0,63	Medium
14	Mertiana Santi	35	78	0,66	Medium
15	Mertiana Urbanus	46	87	0,76	High
16	Susana Leni	56	87	0,70	High
17	Margaretha Da Costa	60	84	0,60	Medium
18	Murnati Sule	55	82	0,60	Medium
19	Meitisa Audina .M	65	93	0,80	High
20	Gustiana Bura	45	75	0,55	Medium
21	Kornelius Kasman	55	77	0,49	Medium
22	Ferdianus Kintong	40	65	0,42	Medium
23	Asno Nokot	60	80	0,50	Medium
24	Ariz Bele	45	75	0,55	Medium
	TOTAL OF GAIN			14,14

Based on the table (4.17) above the students gain was 14,14. It means there was significant enhanced  on vocabulary mastery.

From both table above the researcher can conclude that students in experiment was more significant then control group.

B.  Discussions

This research used Google Translation as the strategy to enhance students’ vocabulary mastery. The second grade students of SMA Darmayadi Makassar were the population of this research and the total numbers of students were 48. Where 24 students’ in experiment group and 22 students’ in control group. The students in experiment group were taught by using google translation. All the data of this research were collected through test.  

Before the students were taught by using the strategy that used in this research, the researcher had given the students of pre-test. It is aimed to find out the students’ prior knowledge. After giving the pre-test, the students were taught by using google translation. In the last meeting, the researcher gave post test.

After having the data of both pre-test and post-test, the researcher compared the students’ result of both pre-test and post-test. It is aimed to find out whether or not there was significance difference between the result of pre-test and post-test, in the other words whether the result of post-test was higher than pre-test or vice versa. And the followings are the detail discussions findings of this research.

Based of the data shown in the previous section, it is known that the students’ minimum score of pre-test for experiment group was 35, and the maximum score was 68. While in the post-test, the students’ minimum score was 64, and the maximum score was 93, and total of gain for experiment group was 14.14. The students’ minimum score in pre test for control group was 30 and the maximum score was 65. While in the post test, the students’ minimum score was 45 and the maximum score was 85, and the total gain for control group was 3.11. From the difference of the total gain for both group above the researcher concluded that experiment group was higher than control group.

The data above proved that, by using google translation as a strategy in learning vocabulary mastery for students’ was good. where the total gain of experiment group was higher then control group.

 when the researcher went to research in second grade of SMA Darmayadi Makassar by using this strategy, all of the students’ like with google translation, because most of them know about google translation.

 In treatment process which enjoyable it have been influenced in students’ motivation, it is also fun and they studied without strain. The students’ more enthusiastic to get their problem by google translation. Since the first meeting until the last. The students’ more concentration in learning process because all of students had a shift to found out their problem means their unfamiliar words, and every students went to front of class with their friends in a group to search in  google translation what’s their unfamiliar words and to know the verbalize the words.

In the treatment, 5 students’ still low to type the unfamiliar words in google translation work sheet, because they are seldom to operate the computer, but no one students got difficult case in the treatment.

The disadvantage of this strategy  means google translation is when the students want to translate the passage. Google Translation can not translate the sentences or text in grammatically, that’s why the researcher used google translate as a strategy to enhance students’ vocabulary mastery. because google traslate work by no means a perfect translation service.

In treatment , the researcher focused on how to find out the students’ unfamiliar words, and how to verbalize the words. it is aimed to know the means of the words and to pronounce the words.

The advantages of this strategy means google translation is the students easy and fast to find out the meaning of the words, and by google translation the students can easy to know how to pronounce the words, and to know the example of using the words.

Students can apply  google translation through their modern Hand phone, I phone or their laptop. when and anywhere, such as in their home, in the canteen, and others places, and it is very easy to help them to understand the unfamiliar words by their self.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter covers some conclusions and suggestion.

A.   Conclusions

Based on the finding and discussion, the researcher would like to put forward some conclusions as follows There is good significant effect in students motivation in learning vocabulary mastery by Google Translation,  and Google Translation makes easy to find out the unfamiliar words or the meaning of the words, to verbalize, and the example of using the words. and Google translation can enhance students’ vocabulary mastery.

B.   Suggestions

Considering the points of conclusions above, the researcher further gives some suggestions as follows :

1.   

56

The teacher should be creative to increase  the students motivation and the teacher also must be creative to find the new method or strategy in learning vocabulary mastery. And one of the method can be used  is Google Translation.

2.   

56

 A teacher should be relaxes in teaching or educating the students, especially in learning English, in this way the students will not be hesitate to express something  that exist in their minds about the topic being discussed.

3.    With the growth of technology in the world specially in our country, many application or software which can be used in our daily activity, such as in School, Hospital, Business, and another. One of  the application we can use is google translation. Particularly in school, it can be used  by teacher in the learning process of English. It is one way to introduce to the students about the modern technology that is Google Translation. Students can learn English by them self  outside  of the school with Google Translation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahmadi, 2004. English vocabulary dialogue could improve the student’s vocabulary achievement. Thesis. Makassar. FKIP Unismuh.

Bear , 2014. Using Google Translate To Teach English. USA.

                      (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Translate).

Bradley, 2009. Quasiexperimental Research. Available online at:

                      (http://www.education.com/reference/article/quasiexperimental-research/#C).Retieved on Tuesday, 23^nd

Davis & Sarrol, 1995. Mastery Learning. ELT Journal, 14. USA.

Dawnson , 1997 An introduction of the quasi experiment research and design. FLS Article .

Depdikbud. 1985. Petunjuk pelaksanaan proses belajar mengajar dan petunjuk pelaksanaan penilaian. Jakarta: Depdikbud.

Foras na gaeilge’s new english-irish dictionary (english database designed and developed for foras na gaeilge by lexicography masterclassltd.Http://esl.about.com/od/modernteachingtechniques/a/teach_english_google_translate.htm)

Gay.1981. Education Research. New York. Graw Hill Book Company

Goulden, Nation and Read, 1990 . Teaching Vocabulary . Cambridge University . USA,

Gwerin, 2014.What language does google translate support. USA.( https://translate.google.com/about/intl/en_ALL/ )

Haerunnufudz, 1998.Teaching Vocabulary through Reading at The second

Year Students of SMU IRNAS Ujung Pandang  ( A Thesis ). Makassar : STKIP – YPUP.

Harbert R. 2013. Vocabulary and its importance in language learning.   Available online at: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13/vocabulary/

         its/importance).Retrieved on Monday,9^th july 2014, 11:30 am

Kasim ,2011. In her thesis with the topyc Incrasing The Students Vocabulary Mastery By using Word Wall Media : UNM

Ko, 2011:1 Furthermore Webster Dictionary . USA (http://05128800.

blogspot.com/2011/06/definition-of-Vocabulary.html )

Kustaryo and Salombe, 1995. Teaching and learning vocabulary. FLS Jurnal, 4. USA. (http://05128765.blogspot.com/1995/11

/learning and teaching-of-Vocabulary.html ) .

McCarten in © Cambridge University Press (2007)  first puplished Teaching Vocabulary Lessons from the Corpus  Lessons for the Classroom : United States of America.

Montgomery, 2007. The Bridge of Vocabulary:  Evidence Based Activities for Academic Success (NCS Pearson Inc.) USA

Murkolori, 2011. Effective Vocabulary Teaching Strategies for The English for The Academic Purposes Els Classroom: SIT Graduate Institute/ SIT Study Abroad.

Paul Nation. 2011. Principles Of Teaching Vocabulary. Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand

Quigley. 2010. How Does Google Translate Work? Thursday,

(https://translate.google.com/about/intl/en_ALL/).

Rogert, 2010. Teaching vocabulary in classrooms, 4/E. www.pearsonhighered.com/product?ISBN=0135001897. Retrieved on june 30 , 2014. USA

Syamsinah,2000.In her tesis “The Effectiveness Of  Context Clues In teaching Vocabulary To The Third Year Students “Of SMU NEGERI 1 HEARLANG

Shoebottom 2014  © Copyright  in Frankfurt International school ( FIS ) 1996 The Importance of vocabulary. USA