TYPICAL ERRORS OF IRANIAN STUDENTS IN WRITTEN RUSSIAN: A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS BASED ON EXAMINATION PAPERS

Abstract

The article presents a comprehensive analysis of typical errors in the written Russian of Iranian undergraduate students studying Russian as a foreign language. Based on 40 examination papers of second- and third-year students at the University of Tehran, grammatical, lexical, syntactic, and graphic-orthographic errors are examined. The findings show that grammatical errors, especially prepositional-case government and aspect-tense forms, are the most widespread. The profile of errors depends on the task type: productive translation reveals more lexical-syntactic difficulties, whereas the test reveals orthographic ones. The results confirm the systematic nature of the errors, caused by interlingual interference and insufficient automation of writing skills. Methodological recommendations for teaching Russian as a foreign language in the Iranian classroom are offered.

Extended Abstract

This study is based on a corpus of 40 examination papers from second- and third-year undergraduate students at the University of Tehran, providing a robust empirical foundation for analyzing error patterns in Russian written speech. The research employs a mixed-method approach that combines quantitative frequency analysis with qualitative description of error types, allowing for both statistical generalization and in-depth interpretation of error mechanisms. The authors distinguish between four main error categories: grammatical, lexical, syntactic, and graphic-orthographic, with each category further subdivided into specific subtypes. Grammatical errors, which constitute the most frequent category, include violations of prepositional-case government (e.g., помогал ей с перевода instead of с переводом), incorrect case form selection, agreement errors in gender, number, and case, and difficulties in verb aspect-tense usage. The study reveals that 85% of second-year and 90% of third-year students exhibit at least one grammatical error, confirming the persistent nature of these difficulties even after two years of instruction.

The research also identifies significant differences in error profiles depending on task type. In translation tasks, which require productive language use, lexical and syntactic errors are more prevalent, as students must independently select appropriate vocabulary and construct coherent sentences from Persian prompts. In cloze-style tests, which provide more structural support, orthographic errors become more prominent. This finding has important pedagogical implications, suggesting that different types of written tasks activate different linguistic competencies and reveal different aspects of interlanguage development. The authors argue that the grammar-translation method dominant in Iranian educational institutions, while effective for developing declarative knowledge of grammatical rules, often fails to develop procedural knowledge necessary for automatic rule application in spontaneous writing.

The persistence of orthographic errors among third-year students (60%) is particularly noteworthy, as it indicates that technical writing skills do not improve automatically alongside grammatical knowledge. Errors such as поетаму for поэтому, сколка for сколько, and дас for даже reflect both phonological interference from Persian and insufficient orthographic automation. The authors emphasize that many errors stem not from complete ignorance of rules but from insufficient automation, where students know the correct form but cannot apply it consistently under the cognitive demands of real-time writing.

Based on their findings, the authors propose seven methodological recommendations for Russian language teaching in Iranian universities: intensifying work on prepositional-case management through comparative exercises; developing automation of grammatical skills through varied situational exercises; systematic instruction in verb aspect with attention to communicative functions; forming lexical collocational competence through contextual presentation; practicing syntactic models of complex sentences; continuing systematic orthographic work throughout all stages of instruction; and reducing error anxiety to encourage productive writing practice. The study contributes significantly to the field of Russian as a foreign language pedagogy in Iran, offering both diagnostic insights and practical teaching strategies grounded in empirical analysis of actual student errors.