Complex Grammatical Structures in EFL: The Case of the Reported Speech and the Passive Voice among Francophone Learners of English in Cameroon Secondary Schools

Author's Information:

Solange SWIRI TUMASANG

University of Maroua, Cameroon

Vol 02 No 11 (2025):Volume 02 Issue 11 November 2025

Page No.: 868-883

Abstract:

The mastery of complex grammatical structures, particularly reported speech and the passive voice, poses significant challenges for Francophone learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in Cameroon. This study investigates the specific difficulties faced by 100 sixth-year Francophone secondary school  students through written production tasks. The analysis was guided by Error Analysis Theory and Interlanguage Theory, with pedagogical insights informed by Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). Findings reveal that structural errors were most prevalent (60%), encompassing incorrect tense shifts, faulty passive constructions, and pronoun misuses. Semantic errors (23.3%) and lexical errors (16.7%) were also observed, indicating learners’ struggles with meaning, contextual appropriateness, and word choice. These patterns suggest that errors are systematic and reflective of learners’ emerging interlanguage, influenced by first-language interference, limited exposure to authentic English, and insufficient opportunities to practice these structures in meaningful contexts. The study highlights the cognitive and syntactic complexity of reported speech and passive constructions, demonstrating that traditional, form-focused grammar instruction is often inadequate. Errors persisted even among learners with moderate proficiency, suggesting that mastery requires repeated, context-rich, communicative practice. The findings underscore the need for instructional approaches that integrate form, meaning, and use, providing learners with varied opportunities to internalize and apply these structures in authentic communicative situations. This research contributes to the understanding of grammatical difficulties in EFL contexts and provides evidence for designing more effective teaching strategies in multilingual environments. It emphasizes the importance of aligning grammar instruction with learners’ communicative needs.

KeyWords:

EFL, reported speech, passive voice, interlanguage, error analysis, communicative language teaching.

References:

  1. Basir, M., Saiful, S., & Firman, F. (2021). An analysis of students’ errors in using passive voice. Journal of English Education, 10(1), 1-12.
  2. Benouioua, A., & Djellal, A. (2018). The impact of limited exposure to English on EFL learners’ fluency. Arab World English Journal, 9(3), 245-257.
  3. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
  4. Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 5(1-4), 161-170.
  5. Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford University Press.
  6. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
  7. Freeman, D., & Freeman, Y. (2004). Essential linguistics: What you need to know to teach reading, ESL, spelling, phonics, and grammar. Heinemann.
  8. Gerhanawati, S., Sofyan, D., & Hidayati, N. (2018). An analysis of students’ errors in using reported speech. English Education Journal, 9(2), 145-158.
  9. Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Penguin.
  10. Jannah, M., et al. (2023). Challenges of learning passive voice in EFL classrooms. Journal of Language and Linguistics, 22(1), 1-15.
  11. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
  12. Lambani, M., & Nephawe, K. (2024). Challenges in teaching reported speech in South African universities. South African Journal of Education, 34(1), 1-12.
  13. Le Thi Mai. (2017). An investigation into errors in reported speech made by first-year English majors. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(4), 701-711.
  14. Li, S. (2023). A comparative study of English majors and non-majors’ use of passive voice. English Language Teaching Journal, 77(2), 1-14.
  15. Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  16. Najah, A., Zainuddin, Z., & Widya Lestari, W. (2024). Errors in passive voice construction among EFL learners. Journal of English Language Teaching, 13(1), 1-12.
  17. Purnama Sari, D., & Fikroni, F. (2025). The effect of limited practice on passive voice mastery. Indonesian Journal of English Education, 7(1), 1-10.
  18. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(3), 209–231.
  19. Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach grammar. Pearson Education.
  20. Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge University Press.
  21. Williams, J. (2004). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford University Press.
  22. Yule, G. (2010). The study of language (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press.