CJR (Critical Journal Review)

This assignment is submitted to fulfill English Grammar subject

Supporting Lecturer :

Group 2
Vivi Nurul Ilmi (0304231006)
Assyifa Padiska (0304233090)
Rosanti (0304231007)
Nicky Aulia (0304232055)

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTEMENT

FACULTY OF TERBIYAH AND TEACHING TRAINING
STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY OF NORTH SUMATRA
MEDAN
2023
 FOREWARD
Alhamdulillahirabbil'alamin, Praise be to the presence of Allah SWT who has given
grace
and gifts so that I can finish this critical journal review properly. Don't forget to also send
sholawat
and greetings to the prophet Muhammad SAW who has brought us from the ignorance era to this
age of knowledge. This critical journal review was created to fulfill an assignment for the
Adjective Journal.
I realize that this problem still has many shortcomings, therefore I really hope for
criticism
and suggestions from all parties to improve and enhance my ability to make other critical journal
reviews in the future.

Medan, 4 November 2023

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWARD.................................................................................................................................................ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS..............................................................................................................................iii
CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1
1.1 Rationalization of the Importance of Critical Journal Review (CJR)....................................1
1.2 Purpose of Writing Critical Journal Review (CJR)................................................................1
1.3 Benefit Writing Critical Journal Review................................................................................1
1.4 Journal Identify......................................................................................................................2
CHAPTER II : SUMMARY OF CONTENT JOURNAL.............................................................................5
2.1 Summary of Main Journal......................................................................................................5
2.2 Summary of First Comparison Journal..................................................................................7
2.3 Summary of Second Comparison Article...............................................................................8
2.4 Summary of Third Comparison Article................................................................................10
2.5 Summary of Fourth Comparison Article..............................................................................11
2.6 Summary of Fifth Comparison Article.................................................................................12
2.7 Summary of Sixth Comparison Article................................................................................12
2.8 Summary of Seventh Comparison Journal...........................................................................14
2.9 Summary of Eight Comparison Journal...............................................................................16
2.10 Summary of Ninth Comparison Journal............................................................................19
CHAPTER III : RESEARCH EXCELLENCE AND RESEARCH WEAKNESS......................................21
CHAPTER IV : CLOSING..........................................................................................................................26
4.1 Conclusion...........................................................................................................................26
4.2 Suggestion............................................................................................................................26

iii
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationalization of the Importance of Critical Journal Review (CJR)

Critical Journal Review (CJR) is very important for educational circles, especially for
students and college students because by criticizing a journal, the student or critic can
compare two journals with the same theme, can see which journal needs to be improved and
which journal is good to use based on the results. research that has been carried out by the
journal writer, after being able to criticize the journal, it is hoped that students will be able to
create a journal because they already know what journal criteria are good and correct to use
and already understand how to write or what steps are needed in writing the journal.

1.2 Purpose of Writing Critical Journal Review (CJR)

This critical journal review was created with the aim of learning through fulfilling
the assignment of the pronounciation subject, State Islamic University of North Sumatra to
create a Critical Journal Review (CJR) so that it can increase knowledge to see or compare
two or more good and correct journals. After being able to compare, you will be able to
create a journal because you can compare which journals are good and which journals still
need to be improved and also because you already understand the steps in creating a journal.

1.3 Benefit Writing Critical Journal Review

The benefits of writing a Critical Journal Review (CJR), namely:

1. Can compare two or more journals reviewed
2. Can improve our analysis of a journal.
3. So that we can know the correct techniques for writing CJR and can write a good and
correct journal.

iv
 4. Increase our knowledge about the contents of research journalsof Writing Critical Journal
Review (CJR)

1.4 Journal Identify

1. Main Journal
Tittle of Journal : The Patterns of Adjective Phrase in Bahasa Mentawai : An
Analysis of X-Bar
Author : Kartika Eva Rahmawati
Agus Subiyanto
Publication Date : December, 2021
Journal Publication : Ridwan Institute
Volume :6
Number :2
ISSN : 2541-0849

2. First Comparison Journal

Tittle of Journal : Adjective Derivational Affixation in English
Author : Baiq Zuhrotun Nafisah
Publication Date : 2016
Journal Publication : Journal Kependidikan
Volume : 15
Number :3
ISSN : 211-218

3. Second Comparison Article

Tittle of Journal : Basic English for Young Learners
Author : MUJAHIDAH
MEGAWATI
MIFTAHUL KHAIRA
REVIT RENDRA W
SHINTA SAFIRAH
WILDAYANTI
Publication Date : July, 2020

v
4. Third Comparison Article
Tittle of Journal : The Adjective
Author : Alexandra Cornilescu
Ion Giurgea

5. Fourth Comparison Article

Tittle of Journal : Adjectives: Highlighting Details
Author : Fatima Hussain

6. Fifth Comparison Article

Tittle of Journal : Grammar : Adjective
Author :-

7. Sixth Comparison Article

Tittle of Journal : Adjectives & Adverbs
Author :-

8. Seventh Comparison Journal

Tittle of Journal : Adjectives
Author : Dayne Sherman
Jayetta Slawson
Natasha Whitton
Jeff Wiemelt
Publication Date : July, 2011
Journal Publication : the Southeastern Writing Center
Volume :-
Number :-
ISSN : 315-326.

9. Eight Comparison Journal

vi
 Tittle of Journal : Determining What Individual SUS Scores Mean: Adding an
Adjective Rating Scale
Author : Aaron Bangor, PhD, CHFP
Philip Kortum, PhD
James A. Miller, PhD
Publication Date : 2008
Journal Publication :-
Volume :-
Number :-
ISSN :-

10. Ninth Comparison Article

Tittle of Journal : Adjectives

vii
 CHAPTER II
SUMMARY OF JOURNAL CONTENT

2.1 Summary of Main Journal

1. Introduction of Main Journal

Morphology is a discipline of linguistics that investigates how words in a
language are formed. A syntactic approach can be used to investigate the patterns of language
creation in morphology. We may see how a sentence in a language is constructed by studying
syntax. A phrase, according to (Chaer, 2007), is a grammatical unit consisting of a group of
words that can complete one of the syntactical functions in a sentence. Each language, including
Bahasa Mentawai, which is spoken in Mentawai, West Sumatra, Indonesia, has its own
construction. Furthermore, (Verhaar, 1996) distinguishes between two sorts of phrases based on
the distribution and function of the words they contain, namely the exocentric phrase and the
endocentric phrase. An exocentric phrase explains why a phrase's syntactic behavior differs from
that of one of its constituent parts. The syntactic behavior of the exocentric phrase is identical to
that of one of its elements. One of them is the adjective phrase.

Adjective phrases are endocentric phrases with adjectives and modifiers such as
adjectives, adverbs, nouns, or verbs as constituent constituents. The adjective phrase is one of the
phrases that will be studied in this research. If a word can function as an attribute, the syntax that
marks it as an adjective is used. The term "attribute" refers to the ability of an adjective to
provide information about the nature or status of things that are referred to as a noun. An
adjective, on the other hand, serves as a predictor. Adjectives can serve as predicates in sentences
when used in conjunction with denial particles such as the usage of not, when used in
conjunction with the words more... than or at most to indicate the level of comparison, and when
used in conjunction with extremely and other reinforcing words.
The construction of adjective phrases in Bahasa Mentawai is made up of core and non-
core parts. The adjective is the core element of the adjective phrase, whereas the modifier is the
non-core element. While the non-core element clarifies what the core elements have mentioned,

viii
in Bahasa Mentawai, the adjective phrase can be made up of non-core elements that come after
the core elements. A word /mabesi?/, is translated in Bahasa Indonesia as “sukar-sukar mudah”.
The core elements that are enclosed in non core elements, such as "bulat maklu baga," which is
translated in Bahasa Indonesia as "sangat besar perut," or "extremely stingy" in English, might
then flank this sentence. A theory known as the X-Bar theory can be utilized as a basis to
evaluate how an adjective phrase is generated in order to reveal the pattern of an adjective
phrase.

2. Research and Method of Main Journal

The data for this study came from a book called Struktur Frasa Dalam Bahasa
Mentawai, written by (Adam & Alwis, 1986) and published by the Indonesian Department of
Education and Culture's Language Development and Language Development Center. The
material in this book was chosen by the author because it is presented in the form of several
sentences containing various noun phrases, adjectives, verbs, and prepositional phrases. The
object of investigation is the adjective phrase. Secondary data is the term for the information
collected in this scenario. Secondary data (researchers' second hand in terms of obtaining data) is
characterized as information gleaned by researchers from a variety of existing sources, such as
the books mentioned earlier.

A literature review was conducted to gather information for this investigation (Moh,
2013). This was accomplished by looking for books that had data sources. In terms of data
collection, the writer employed the note-taking method by (Sudaryanto, 2015). He claimed that
some writing tools may be used to take notes. Thus, the writer used pen and paper to collect data
in the form of adjective phrases, as described in Struktur Frasa Dalam Bahasa Mentawai (1990).
Purposive sampling, as described by (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2018), was also utilized in
this investigation to choose acceptable data. Meanwhile, (Sugiyono, 2010) added that this
technique enables the in the book which is represent data such as sentences or words containing
adjective
phrases.
The writer utilized a descriptive-qualitative technique to present and analyze the facts
using the X-Bar theory, the writer will offer the facts in the form of adjective phrases, followed
by an analysis. Linguistic research is frequently incorporated in qualitative descriptive studies

ix
(Perangin-angin, 2010). The goal of this research methodology is to draw broad conclusions
based on phenomena discovered via data analysis.

2.2 Summary of First Comparison Journal

1. Introduction of First Comparison Journal

Morphology is the field of linguistics that studies morphemes and their
combinations, and is part of the structure of language that includes words and word parts, namely
morpheme (Kridalaksana, 2008: 159). Furthermore, Bauer (1983: 13) states morphology as a sub
branch of linguistics deals with the internal structure of word-forms. Based on the definition of
the morphology, it can be understood as a branch of linguistics related to the internal structure of
words, word formation process and also the rules that accompany these processes. The rules that
accompanied these processes are known as morphological processes. Some of the morphological
processes that are commonly used in the formation of an English word that is affixation,
clitization, internal change, suppletion, compounding, conversion, clipping, blends,
backformation and acronyms. Among some of themorphological processes, the affixation
process is the formation of the most important words by adding affixes (Bauer, 1988: 19). the
derivation is important to know the business-class categorization of morphological process of
word regularity contained in a specific language. By knowing the derivation of a language, then
the system will know how the construction of a single word class changed into another word
class (Verhaar, 2006: 118).

2. Research and Method of First Comparison Journal

Derivational affixation process at a basic form resulted in a change in form and

the grammatical meaning of the word. Each of adjective derivational affixes has different
meaning and there are some affixes which has the same meaning to other affixes. The
grammatical meaning which appears on the derivative adjective in English is the results of the
process of derivational affixation, some of them have meaning related to ―negation‖, ―capable
of‖, ―appraisal‖, ―quality‖, ―relation‖, ―characteristics‖, ―process‖, ―situation‖, ―behavior‖,
as it can be seen in the following data: prefix and suffix.

x
 the formation process of the adjective derivational affixation, the amount of affixes that
can be used in forming the adjective form of prefixes and suffixes. Relatively very small number
of prefixes and suffixes are affixes of the most widely used in forming adjectives, and
grammatical meaning when the affix-affix is attached to the base form. In use, there are some
who do not affix can only attach to one type of word class, which clung to the basic form is not
only a form of words but also forms the basis of the derived word. This study is the general
research about adjective derivational affixation process in English. It would be very interesting if
there is more research-themed process of derivational affixation and word formation in English,
mainly associated with the morphophonemic process that occurs in the formation of words in
English, and also the process of derivation zero in English, and a variety of other issues that can
assessed.

2.3 Summary of Second Comparison Article

Adjectives are words used to give properties to nouns(nouns) or pronouns (pronouns).

And also Adjectives are words thatused to explain or limit the meaning of a noun or pronoun

(pronoun).For example: happy (joyful); beautiful (beautiful); clever (smart); far (far); one

(one), third (the third), much (many), and so on.

In general, adjectives are divided into 2 (two) types, namely:

1. Descriptive Adjectives (descriptive adjectives)

Descriptive adjectives are adjectives used to describe wordsobjects (nouns) or pronouns

which include size, shape, measure, weight,smell, taste, color and so on. For example big (big),
near (close), clever (clever) andetc.

1) Descriptive adjectives can take various forms, including:

a. Proper adjective (proper name adjective)

b . Participal adjective (participial adjective)

c. Compound adjective (combined adjective)

2) Limiting Adjectives (limiting adjectives)

xi
 Limiting adjectives are adjectives used to narrow down or limits nouns or pronouns
without giving formationregarding the condition, type, etc. For example, your book (your
book), that car (that car), four woman (four women), this watch (this watch), and so on.

a. Proper Adjective (proper name adjective)

b. Adjective of Quality (adjective of condition)

c. Adjective of Quantity (amount adjective)

d. Numeral Adjective (number adjective)

e. Demonstrative Adjective (demonstrative adjective)

3) Interrogative Adjective (adjective of the questioner)\

Interrogative adjective is an adjective that functions as a question word. Say This must be
followed by the noun being asked.Included in this word are what, which, whose, and others.
Example the sentence is:

What book is this?

4) Possessive Adjective (possessive adjective)

Possessive adjective is an adjective used to express possession or possession of an object,
whether animate or physical lifeless.
Possessive adjectives include:
My
Your
Our
Their
His
Her
Its
5) Distributive adjective (distributive adjective)
Distributive adjective is an adjective used to indicate that the noun in question is or
individual, or a word an adjective indicating that nouns are used one after another or in depth
separate parts.

xii
2.4 Summary of Third Comparison Article

1. Introduction of Third Comparison Article

Adjectives are characterized by the following distributional and morphological

proper ties: (i) they can function as noun modiiers (adjuncts: optional constituents of the NP); (ii)
they are inlected for gender, number and case (with very few exceptions), receiving a value for
these features by agreement with the head noun; (iii) beside the adnominal use, of them are also
allowed in predicative positions, in which case they agree with the subject; (iv) adjectives may
combine with degree words such as mai ‘more’, foarte ‘very’. his property, which distinguishes
adjectives from nouns and verbs, is also found with adverbs and some prepositions. he inlections
of adjectives are shared by nouns and determiners. Due to this morphological similarity between
adjectives and nouns in languages such as Greek, Latin and Romance (including Romanian),
adjectives have been included among the nominal categories in traditional grammars (the term
adjective comes from the Latin nomen adiectiuum ‘added name (noun) (i.e. noun added to
another one)’, itself a translation of the Greek ónoma epítheton). he inlection of adjectives is
presented in a general chapter on nominal inlection (Chapter 16).

2. Research of Third Comparison Article

Adjectives can express relations, in which case all the arguments except the
external one are expressed by complements, i.e. constituents sub-categorized by the adjectival
head. As adjectival phrases do not license structural case (see §1.2 above), the complements of
adjectives are introduced by prepositions or oblique case forms (Romanian only has the dative as
an oblique case). here is only one adjective (dator ‘owing’) which takes a complement without an
introductory element, which will be discussed in a separate Section. his fact, as well as the
parallel with modal reduced relatives, noticed in (524) above, indicates that the supine in TCs is
passive. herefore, the type of movement involved in TCs is not of the type found in English,

xiii
combining A-bar and A-movement, but it only involves the type of movement found with
passive participles: the deep object of the verb becomes the external argument (subject or head
noun) of the [Adj+Supine] constituent.

2.5 Summary of Fourth Comparison Article

Adjectives are words that describe, identify, or quantify nouns and pronouns. They
highlight details and sharpen the image or idea they modify.

 Descriptive adjectives describe a noun.

Example: Jenny drives a black Porsche.
 Identifying adjectives indicate which thing is being referred to.
Example: We have never been to that store.
 Quantitative adjectives quantify a noun.
Example: I have three brothers and two sisters.

Proper Adjectives
Proper adjectives are formed from proper nouns and must be capitalized.

Example of Proper Adjectives : My friend Jasmine is Lebanese.

Descriptive Adjectives
Descriptive adjectives have three forms that express different degrees.

Example of Descriptice Adjectives

Positive: That is a small cat.

Comparative: That cat is smaller than my cat.

Superlative: That is the smallest cat I have ever seen.

Subclasses of Adjectives
There are two subclasses of adjectives: attributive and predicative.

Attributive Adjectives
Attributive adjectives usually come before a noun and characterize the noun.

xiv
Examples of Attributive Adjectives : The skinny man is running.

Predicative Adjectives
Predicative adjectives occur in the predicate of a sentence (after the subject and main verb).
Examples of Predicative Adjectives : That man is skinny.

2.6 Summary of Fifth Comparison Article

 An adjective is a word that describes a noun. An adjective usually

comes before the noun it describes.

 Some adjectives are descriptive. They tell what kind of person,
place, or thing the noun is.
 Some adjectives tell how many.
 Some adjectives are limiting, such as this, that, these, and those.
 The articles a, an, and the are special adjectives.
 Use an before an adjective or a nonspecifi c singular noun that
 begins with a vowel.
 Use the before singular and plural nouns when referring to
something specifi c.
 Some adjectives are limiting, such as this, that, these, and those.
 Use commas to separate three or more words in a series.
 Use a comma between the day and the year in a date.
 Use a comma after introductory words.
 Some adjectives change their spelling when -er or -est is added.
 When the adjective ends in a consonant and y, change the y to i
and add -er or -est.
 When the adjective ends in e, drop the e and add -er or -est.
 When adjectives have a short vowel sound before a fi nal
consonant, double the fi nal consonant and add -er or -est

xv
2.7 Summary of Sixth Comparison Article

Adjectives modify nouns or pronouns. Examples of some common adjectives are: young,
small, loud, short, fat, pretty. You can also identify many adjectives by the following common
endings.

Adverbs, on the other hand, modify verbs, adjectives, other adverbs, and even whole
clauses. Adverbs can tell us how something is done, when it is done, and where it is done.
Examples of some common adverbs are: really, quickly, especially, early, well, immediately,
yesterday.

Adjectives

xvi
In order to avoid confusion, try to place adjectives as close as possible to the nouns or pronouns
they modify. Most one-word adjectives come right before the nouns they modify. In the
examples below, the adjectives are double-underlined and the nouns they modify are in italics.
Adverbs
As with adjectives, adverbs need to be placed where the reader can clearly understand the
meaning you intend. Adverbs are a bit more flexible, however: both single-word and multiple-
word adverb phrases can generally be placed either before or after the words they modify. In the
examples below, the adverbs and adverb phrases are underlined and the words they modify are in
italics.

2.8 Summary of Seventh Comparison Journal

An adjective modifies a noun or pronoun by providing descriptive or specific detail.

Unlike adverbs, adjectives do not modify verbs, other adjectives, or adverbs. Adjectives usually
precede the noun or pronoun they modify. Adjectives do not have to agree in number or gender
with the nouns they describe.

Types of Adjectives
Descriptive Adjectives
A descriptive adjective names a quality of the noun or pronoun that it modifies.
Example: brown dog
Proper Adjectives
A proper adjective is derived from a proper noun.
Example: French class
Limiting Adjectives
A limiting adjective restricts the meaning of the word it modifies.
Example: that car
Interrogative Adjectives
An interrogative adjective is used to ask a question.
Example: Whose book is this?

xvii
Coordinate Adjectives
A coordinate adjective consists of two or more adjectives separated by a comma instead of by a
coordinating
conjunction.
Example: a cold, rainy day

To determine if you can replace the coordinating conjunction with a comma, see if the
adjectives can be reversed or if and can be added between the adjectives without changing the
meaning. If the adjectives can be reversed, they are coordinate and a comma can be used.

Compound Adjectives
Compound adjectives consist of two or more words that function as a unit. Depending on its
position within the
sentence, the compound adjective is punctuated with or without a hyphen. When a compound
adjective comes before the noun it modifies, use a hyphen to join the adjectives. When a
compound adjective follows the noun it modifies, do not use a hyphen to join the adjectives.
Example: She is taking a class on nineteenth-century literature. (The adjective nineteenth-
century precedes
the noun literature so a hyphen is used.)
Determiners as Adjectives
Determiners, such as articles, pronouns, and numbers, can function as adjectives. When a
determiner is used as an
adjective, it restricts the noun it modifies, like a limiting adjective. Determiners functioning as
adjectives tell Which
one?, How many?, and Whose?
Example: Bob’s house is only three blocks from that house. (Bob’s answers the question:
Whose house? Three
answers the question: How many blocks? That answers the question: Which house is three
blocks from
Bob’s house?)

xviii
Using Adjectives
Adjectives as Subject Complements
The subject complement is a word that follows a linking verb and modifies the sentence’s
subject, not its verb. Linking
verbs: appear, become, believe, feel, grow, smell, seem, sound, remain, turn, prove, look, taste,
and the forms of the verb to be.
Example: The crowd appeared calm. (The linking verb appeared links the noun the subject
crowd with the adjective
calm)
Adjectives as Object Complements
The object complement is a word that follows a sentence’s direct object and modifies that object
and not the verb. An object complement answers the question what? after the direct object.
Example: Bob considered the experiment a success. (Success is the object compliment that
modifies the sentences
direct object experiment.)
Adjectives with Past and Present Participle Verbs
Adjectives are frequently formed by using the past participle (-ed, -t, or -en) and the present
participle (-ing) verb forms.
Example: The group of children scared the sleeping dog. (Sleeping describes the baby.)

2.9 Summary of Eight Comparison Journal

1. Introduction of Eight Comparison Journal

There are numerous surveys available to usability practitioners to aid them in
assessing the usability of a product or service. Many of these surveys are used to evaluate
specific types of interfaces, while others can be used to evaluate a wider range of interface types.
The System Usability Scale (SUS) (Brooke, 1996) is one of the surveys that can be used to
assess the usability of a variety of products or services. There are several characteristics of the
SUS that makes its use attractive. First, it is composed of only ten statements, so it is relatively
quick and easy for study participants to complete and for administrators to score. Second, it is
nonproprietary, so it is cost effective to use and can be scored very quickly, immediately after
completion. Third, the SUS is technology agnostic, which means that it can be used by a broad

xix
group of usability practitioners to evaluate almost any type of user interface, including Web sites,
cell phones, interactive voice response (IVR) systems (both touch-tone and speech), TV
applications, and more. Lastly, the result of the survey is a single score, ranging from 0 to 100,
and is relatively easy to understand by a wide range of people from other disciplines who work
on project teams. Bangor, Kortum, and Miller (2008) described the results of 2,324 SUS surveys
from 206 usability tests collected over a ten year period. In that study, it was found that the SUS
was highly reliable (alpha = 0.91) and useful over a wide range of interface types. The study also
concluded that while there was a small, significant correlation between age and SUS scores (SUS
scores decreasing with increasing age), there was no effect of gender. Further, it was confirmed
that the SUS was predictive of impacts of changes to the user interface on usability when
multiple changes to a single product were made over a large number of iterations. Other
researchers have also found that the SUS is a compact and effective instrument for measuring
usability. Tullis and Stetson (2004) measured the usability of two Web sites using five different
surveys (including the Questionnaire for User Interaction Satisfaction [QUIS], the SUS, the
Computer System Usability Questionnaire [CSUQ], and two vendor specific surveys) and found
that the SUS provided the most reliable results across a wide range of sample sizes. One of the
unanswered questions from previous research has been the meaning of a specific SUS score in
describing a product‟s usability. Is a score of 50 sufficient to say that a product is usable, or is a
score of 75 or 100 required?

2. Research and Method of Eight Comparison Journal

The SUS is composed of ten statements, each having a five-point scale that ranges
from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. There are five positive statements and five negative
statements, which alternate. While the SUS has been demonstrated to be fundamentally sound,
our group found that some small changes helped participants complete the SUS. First, a short set
of instructions were added that reminded them to mark a response to every statement and not to
dwell too long on any one statement. Second, the term cumbersome in the original Statement 8
was replaced with awkward. (This same change was independently made by Finstad, 2006.)
Finally, the term system was changed to product, based on participant feedback. The current SUS
form being used in our laboratories is shown in Figure 1.

xx
 The finding that the adjective rating scale very closely matches the SUS scale suggests
that it is a useful tool in helping to provide a subjective label for an individual study‟s mean SUS
score. Given the strength of the correlation, it may be tempting to think about using the single
question adjective rating alone, in place of the SUS. Certainly administration of a single item
instrument would be more efficient, and the result would be an easy to interpret metric that could
be quickly shared within the product team. However, there are several reasons why using a
single item scale alone may not be the best course. First, in the absence of objective measures,
like task success rates or time-on-task measures, we cannot adequately determine whether the
SUS or the adjective rating scale is the more accurate metric. Indeed, anecdotal evidence in our
lab suggests that a test participant may provide a favorable SUS score, yet fail to complete the
tasks being tested. The reverse has also been observed. Collecting this kind of corroborating data
is an effort that we will be undertaking in future studies. Second, psychometric theory suggests
that multiple questions are generally superior to a single question. Many studies have found that
multiple question surveys tend to yield more reliable results than single question surveys. For
example, in a study of overall job satisfaction, Oshagbemi (1999) found that single item
measures tended to produce a higher score on job satisfaction than did the comparable multi-
question surveys. Because specific elements of dissatisfaction could not be uniquely addressed,
the single question survey tended to dilute dissatisfaction measures. In another study, users were
asked to determine their intake of fish products. In one survey, respondents were asked to
estimate intake for 71 different fish items, and in another survey they were asked a single
question regarding their intake of fish. The results showed that when respondents used the single
question survey they underestimated their intake of fish by approximately 50% (Mina, Fritschi,
& Knuiman, 2007). These studies seem to indicate the superiority of multiple item
questionnaires.

It seems clear that the term OK is probably not appropriate for this adjective rating scale.
Not only is its meaning too variable, but it may also give the intended audience for SUS scores a
mistaken impression that an OK score is satisfactory in some way. Using other, established
rating scales (Babbitt & Nystrom, 1989), we believe that the terms fair or so-so are likely to still
result in a mid-point value on the scale, while at the same time appropriately connoting an
overall level of usability that is not acceptable in some way. Because of the questions about how
accurately the actual adjectives map to SUS scores, we are also considering testing a different

xxi
adjective scale. As described earlier, we have found that a useful analog to convey a study‟s
mean SUS score to others involved in the product development process has been the traditional
school grading scale (i.e., 90-100 = A, 80-89 = B, etc.) (Bangor, Kortum, & Miller, 2008). This
has strong face validity for our existing data insofar as a score of 70 has traditionally meant
passing, and our data show that the average study mean is about 70. We had earlier proposed a
set of acceptability ranges (Bangor, Kortum, & Miller, 2008) that would help practitioners
determine if a given SUS score indicated an acceptable interface or not. The grading scale
matches quite well with these acceptability scores as well. Figure 4 shows how the adjective
ratings compare to both the school grading scale and the acceptability ranges.

2.10 Summary of Ninth Comparison Journal

1. Introduction of Ninth Comparison Journal

In The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, adjectives are

characterized as expressions “that alter, clarify, or adjust the meaning contributions of nouns”, in
order to allow for the expression of “finer gradations of meaning” than are possible through the
use of nouns alone (Huddleston and Pullum 2002, p. 526). At a general level, adjectives gain this
capability in virtue of two main characteristics, one of which is semantic and one of which is
syntactic. On the semantic side, they introduce properties. (Whether they actually denote
properties is a question we will address in detail below.) On the syntactic side, they are able to
function as modifiers, and so may (with some restrictions) combine recursively with nouns. The
result of this combination is a new property which is typically (though not always) true of a
subset of the entities that the original properties are true of, thereby providing a “finer gradation
of meaning” than is possible using the noun alone. This simple picture hides many important and
interesting complexities, however, which provide insights on several topics of central interest to
both linguists and philosophers, including: vagueness, contextualism, relativism,
compositionality, and the semantic analysis of significant phenomena such as modality. I begin
with an examination of the distributional properties of adjectives, then summarize the most
prominent analyses of their meanings, and finally conclude with a look at some of the roles that
adjectives have played in reasoning about the issues and phenomena mentioned above.

2. Research and Method of Ninth Comparison Journal

xxii
 Adjectives have played a prominent role in a number of philsophical discussions
of aspects of human language, as I will document in this section, but perhaps the most prominent
is their role in the characterization and analysis of vagueness (chapter 4.13). The problem of
vagueness is essentially the problem of being unable or unwilling to say of any single point along
an ordering generated by the meaning of a particular term whether that point separates the things
that the term is true of from the things that it is false of. Vagueness is not a feature of adjectives
alone, but adjectives provide a particularly rich empirical ground for investigating it, because so
many of them fall into the class of gradable adjectives discussed in the previous section, and so
(in their basic, unmodified forms) introduce properties that are true of false of objects depending
on their position on a scale. A central question in work on gradable adjectives and vagueness is
whether vagueness is the defining characteristic of the class, with their other significant
properties, such as the possibility of forming comparative constructions like those in (25), arising
as a result of this feature, or whether vagueness is derived. The first view is seen in the work of
Wheeler (1972), Kamp (1975), Klein (1980), van Benthem (1982), and most recently by van
Rooij (in press), who provide compositional semantic analyses of various kinds of comparative
constructions in terms of an initial analysis of gradable adjectives as vague property terms. This
approach has the advantage of explaining the apparent morphological universal mentioned at the
end of the previous section: if there is a difference in morphosyntactic complexity between the
positive and comparative form of an adjective, it is always the latter that is complex. (Though it
should be noted that many languages — probably the majority — do not make a
morphosyntactic distinction between the forms; see Ultan 1972.) The second view is associated
with degree-based analyses of gradable adjectives of the sort discussed in the previous section:
since adjectives do not denote properties at all, but rather relations between individuals and
degrees, there is no 12sense in which the basic meanings of the terms are vague. Instead,
vagueness is introduced compositionally through the mapping of such relations to properties. In
particular, if this mapping is achieved through composition with a phonologicall null “positive”
morpheme, as described above, this opens up the analytical possibility of associating vagueness
with the particular semantic features of this morpheme, a move advocated and justified by Fara
(2000) and Kennedy (2007, in press). Adjectives have also played an important role in
discussions of the implications of variable judgments about truth for theories of meaning. Recent
work on semantic relativism (see chapter 4.15) has focused extensively on differences in truth

xxiii
judgments of sentences containing adjectives of personal taste like tasty and fun (see e.g. Richard
2004; Lasersohn 2005; MacFarlane 2005; Stephenson 2007; Cappelen and Hawthorne 2009),
and researchers interested in motivating contextualist semantic analyses have often used facts
involving gradable adjectives (recall the judgments in (23) which show that the threshold for
what “counts as” tall can change depending on whether we are talking about jockeys or
basketball players) to develop arguments about the presence (or absence) of contextual paramters
in other types of constructions, such as knowledge statements (see e.g. Unger 1975; Lewis 1979;
Cohen 1999; Stanley 2004, and chapters 3.7 and 4.14). Other researchers have attempted to
account for the apparent context sensitivity of these examples without importing context
dependence into the semantics (see e.g. Cappelen and Lepore 2005).

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH EXCELLENCE AND RESEARCH WEAKNESS

No Journal / Article Excellence / Weakness

1. The Patterns of Adjective Phrase in Plus
Bahasa Mentawai : An Analysis of 1. By studying using this journal we can learn
X-Bar the Mentawai regional language and also English
2. Many words are given italics and bold to
make it easier
3. The journal contains many expert opinions,
making the journal facts based on research

Minus
1. The spacing between paragraphs is not neat
2. Too many words are italicized, bolded and in
different colors, even though they are useful to
make things easier for readers

2. Adjective Derivational Affixation in Plus

xxiv
 English 1. choose words that are easy to understand
2. The screen/page is divided into 2 so it looks
neater and more economical

Minus
1.The typing is not neat because there are several
words whose spacing is different

3. Basic English for Young Learners plus

1. Basic English explains various types of
English grammar, from the most basic grammar
to the most sophisticated grammar
2. Basic English teaches us to practice English
more often or start with vocabulary
3. Basic English is very important for us in
learning grammar
Minus
1. Basic English is very difficult to master,
especially for beginners
2. Basic English has many divisions in one
division, divided into several parts, which makes
basic English very difficult to understand.
4. The Adjective Plus
1. Makes it easier for us to learn grammar
2. so that we can understand that the adjective
has many parts and we must understand each
part
3. Makes it easier for us to understand adjectives
because the adjectives have complete
explanations and examples

xxv
 Minus
1. The large number of adjectives that cause us
to be confused or not understand enough
2. There are several adjectives that contain the
same meaning or can be called repetition
5. Adjectives: Highlighting Details Plus
1. neat journal arrangement, easy to understand
2. Use other font colors for sub-chapter borders
so that readers can more easily understand the
journal sections
3. Equipped with practice questions for readers

Minus
1. There is no answer key
2. The explanation is too short
6. Grammar : Adjective Plus
1. contains many example questions
2. short explanation but easy to understand
3. Each sub-chapter provides example questions
and practice questions

Minus
1. The journal is more like an answer sheet
because there are more questions than
explanations
2. There are lots of questions but no answer key
7. Adjectives & Adverbs Plus
1.adjectives and adverbs are types of words that
provide more information about other words in
the sentence. - *Adjectives:* Adjectives that
provide additional information about the noun
(noun) in the sentence. For example, "beautiful"

xxvi
 in the sentence "a beautiful flower". - *Adverb:*
An adverb that provides additional information
about the verb
2. makes it easier for us to make examples of
adjective adverbs
3. The explanation is longer because an adjective
adverb is two sentences combined to form many
meanings
Minus
1. This adjective adverb is very difficult to
understand because the discussion is difficult
and too complicated
8. Adjectives Plus
1. Makes it easier for us to understand what is
meant by adjectives or grammar
2.adjectives have many meanings of division
3. makes it easier for us to create words,
sentences and paragraphs
Minus
1. The minus is that it is very difficult to
understand what it is if we don't
understand it correctly
9. Determining What Individual SUS Plus
1. very attractive and neat arrangement in all
parts
2. There is a table so that it makes the research
more factual
3. The author and the author's photo are
displayed with their background so that the
quality of the material is guaranteed in the
journal

xxvii
 Minus
1. Too many tables can be confusing for readers
who don't know how to read tables/diagrams
10. Adjactives Plus
1. This text discusses the characteristics of
adjectives, which allow the expression of "finer
gradations of meaning" compared to the use of
nouns alone.
2. The text also discusses the distributional
nature of adjectives, including their use as
predicate terms and their ability to function as
complements to epistemic verbs such as "seem"
and "appear".
3. The text also mentions that all languages have
terms that share the same semantic properties as
English adjectives, but the distribution patterns
of these terms can vary.
Minus
1. It does not provide concrete examples of the
distribution of adjectives in English.
2. It does not give examples of the distribution of
adjectives in other languages, although it is
mentioned that the distribution of adjectives can
vary across languages.
3. Does not provide an in-depth explanation of
how adjectives can play a role in the
examination of issues such as, contextualism,
relativism, compositionality, and semantic
analysis of significant phenomena such as
modality.

xxviii
 CHAPTER IV
CLOSING

4.1 Conclusion

From the discussion of the excellence and the weaknesses that have been explained or
explained above, each journal, namely the main journal, the first comparison journal, the second
comparison article, the third comparison article, the fourth comparison article, the fifth
comparison article, the sixth comparison article, the seventh comparison article, the eight
comparison article, and the ninth comparison article, has its own excellence and weaknesses both
in terms of writing, grammar and also the depth of the material. So it can be concluded that the
five journals are good and can be used as references for readers, but still need improvement. So it
can be concluded that the journal is suitable or good for readers to use as a reference for other
research.

4.2 Suggestion

In the future or beyond, the weaknesses or shortcomings of each of these journals need to
be corrected so that they can be better utilized or used by readers as references in research or for
other uses.

xxix