The Comparison of Lexical Bundles in EFL Teachers’ Talk between Non-native and Native English Teachers

____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ Lexical bundles are multi-word expressions that usually hang together. They are considered as a main factor in building fluency in academic discourse; helping to shape meanings and coherence in a text. The objectives of the study are to analyse non-native and native English teachers’ talk in order to explain (1) the use of structural and functional types of lexical bundles in non-native and native English teachers’ talk, (2) the similarities and differences of lexical bundles used in the talk, (3) the relation between structural and functional types of lexical bundles used in the talk. This study is a qualitative study and designed as a classroom discourse analysis. The data are non-native and native English teachers’ talk. The results reveal that non-native and native English teachers used all types of lexical bundles structurally and functionally. Similarly, both teachers performed lexical bundles in form of verb phrase and they mostly functioned as stance expressions. However, they performed them differently in terms of the sub-types. Non-native English


INTRODUCTION
EFL classroom is the main place where students are exposed to the target language. Thus, EFL classroom teachers' talk is very important to provide the exposure. Harmer in Basra and Thoyyibah (2017) stated that students learn from the teachers' talk. That is the reason why the teachers are expected to know how to talk to students and adjust the language that they use because teachers' talk gives a chance for students to hear the language which they might understand. Dealing with acquisition, it is said that teachers' talk is the major source of comprehensible input that students are likely to receive. The more exposure students obtain from teachers' talk, the more input they will receive. Widhiyanto (2017) argued that even though students may not be explicitly taught any subject on certain matters, they have observed them in their practices throughout their study.
In learning a new language, learners are expected to achieve communicative competence to communicate successfully. As stated by Colle and Fitriati (2019), the language instruction used by teachers must be integrated with the component of communicative competence. To support the argument, Neno and Agustien (2016) claimed that communicative competence aims at creating meaningful texts both written and spoken. Formulaic competence is one of some competencies in communicative competence to help learners create meaningful texts specifically to sound natural and fluent when speaking.
Celce-Murcia (2007) stated that "formulaic competence as well as formulaic expression refers to those fixed and prefabricated chunks of language that speakers use heavily in everyday interaction" (p. 47). There are five types of formulaic expression mentioned by Biber et al. (1999). They are collocations, idioms, lexical bundles, binomial expressions, and inserts. This study will focus on lexical bundles. Lexical bundles are considered as a main factor in building fluency in academic discourse; helping to shape meanings and coherence in a text (Islami, Fitriati & Mujiyanto, 2019;Ranjbar et al., 2012). Biber, Johansson, Leech, and Finegan (1999) define lexical bundles as recurrent expressions, regardless of their idiomaticity and regardless of their structural status. That is, lexical bundles are simply sequences of word forms that commonly go together in natural discourse.
Referring to Biber et. al (2004), there are two types of lexical bundles; structural and functional types. Each type has three sub-types as well. They can be seen in the following figure;

Figure 1. Illustration of lexical bundles types
There have been a lot of linguists conducted studies on lexical bundles in spoken discourse (Conrad and Biber, 2005;Heng, Kashiha and Tan, 2014;Darweesh and Ali, 2017;Sykes, 2017;Wang;. However, there are few comparative studies of lexical bundles conducted in spoken discourse (Kwon and Lee, 2014;Kashiha and Heng, 2015). To this case, this present study aims at analysing the use of structural and functional types of lexical bundles in EFL classroom teachers' talk. Particularly, the study investigates non-native and native English teachers' use of lexical bundles in their talk as well as figures out the similarities and

METHOD
This study belongs to qualitative study and is designed as a classrrom discourse analysis. This study focused on analysing spoken form as the data of this study in terms of teachers' talk. The researcher attempts to do indepth analysis on the subjects being studied, namely non-native and native English teachers. There are two non-native and two native English teachers as the subjects of the study.
In this study, the researcher evaluates lexical bundles that occur in non-native and native English teachers' talk. The lexical bundles occur in the talk are classified according to their structures and functions using the structural and functional taxonomies proposed by Biber et al. (2004).
The data in this study were gathered by recording the teachers' talk during the teaching and learning process. The researcher recorded the teaching and learning process for 4 meetings; 2 meetings in native English teachers' classes and the other 2 in the non-native ones. The data from the video recording were then transcribed so that the teachers' utterances can be seen clearly in form of sentences. After transcribing the data, the researcher identified the lexical bundles found in the utterances. Then, the researcher classified the data in tables containing elements of structural and functional types of lexical bundles and analysed them. Finally, from the results, the researcher interpreted the findings and drew conclusions.
To guarantee the reliability and validity of the result, the researcher did triangulation. In this study, the researcher employed member checking. The results are returned to participants to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences. The researcher interviewed the participants to open up alternative interpretation on the findings and to minimize the subjectivity of the researcher's own interpretation.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
As a result, the researcher found that there were 233 bundles used in the teachers' talk. Non-native English teachers used 139 bundles in their talk, while native English teachers performed 110 bundles in their talk. All 233 bundles became the main data in this research which were analysed structurally and functionally based on Biber et. al (2004) taxonomy.

The Structural Types of Lexical Bundles used by Non-Native and Native English Teachers
From the data analysis, it is found that structurally, non-native and native English teachers mainly used lexical bundles that incorporate verb phrase fragments in the talk. There were only small proportion of lexical bundles that incorporate dependent clause or noun phrase and prepositional phrase fragments. The distribution of structural types of lexical bundles in teachers' talk can be seen in the following table: This finding is similar to the findings of the previous studies done by Biber et al. (2004) and Heng, Kashiha and Tan (2014). Biber et al. (2004) investigated the use of lexical bundles in university classroom teaching and textbooks. This previous study provides a finding that almost 90% of all common lexical bundles incorporate verb phrases.
Heng, Kashiha and Tan (2014) investigated the use of lexical bundles in group discussion. The result revealed that the students used verb phrase fragments more than dependent clause or noun phrase and prepositional phrase fragments. Students seemed to rely more on verb phrases in order to express their opinion (I think that the), show their agreement or disagreement (I agree with you), ask for more information or introduce topic by asking yes/no questions (what do you think), and emphasize the topic by using passive tense (is based on the).
The findings of this study revealed that non-native and native English teachers used more verb phrase fragments in their talk. Nonnative English teachers mostly used 2nd person pronoun + VP fragment such as you have to, you can go, you can discuss. Excerpt 1 Teacher : I'll say an adjective, for example tall. In the excerpts above, non-native English teachers use the pronoun "you" to point to the students as the interlocutors. "You" referred to one student or students as a class.
In addition, native English teachers also mainly used verb phrase in the talk. In this case, native English teachers used the bundles how do you think to ask for opinion and who wants to, who is next to ask for the next person.

The Functional Types of Lexical Bundles used by Non-native and Native English Teachers
In relation to functional types of lexical bundles, it is found that stance bundles were the most prevalent functional category used by nonnative English and native English teachers. Nevertheless, they also performed lexical bundles as discourse organizers and referential expressions in the talk. The distribution of structural types of lexical bundles in teachers' talk can be seen in the following table: This result is similar to the result of some studies conducted by Kashiha and Heng (2015), Kwon and Lee (2014) and Fitriati and Wahyuni (2018). In their study, Kashiha and Heng (2015) investigated the use of formulaic language by native and non-native speakers. The results revealed that non-native speakers used a high range of stance expressions.
Another study conducted by Kwon and Lee (2014) about lexical bundles in Korean EFL teacher talk corpus revealed that lexical bundles as stance expressions were used the most. The bundle you have to is the most frequent bundle that functions as showing obligation. In 2018, Fitriati and Wahyuni investigated the use of lexical bundles and their functions in WhatsApp conversations between a native and a non-native speaker of English. It aimed at exploring the lexical bundles used by the two speakers in order to explain how these bundles contribute to the coherence in the conversation. The results revealed that the lexical bundles produced by native and non-native speakers of English mostly express stance between the speaker and the hearer.
In this study, non-native English teachers performed lexical bundles as stance expressions the most. They frequently performed lexical bundles in showing ability. They used the bundles you can make, you can use, you can work in the talk. Excerpt 5 Teacher : It depends on you, you can make it into negative or question. For example, can you make it into question?
Students : Okay, so I can say "do yo want to go anywhere cool?".

Excerpt 6
Teacher : you can work together and compare your answer. It is possible to have more than one answer.

Student : Finished
The teachers used the bundle you can make, you can use, you can work to show ability, especially to give them alternatives that they are able to do things differently.

The Similarities and Differences of Lexical Bundles used by Non-native and Native English Teachers
From the results of this study, it is found that there are some similarities and differences of lexical bundles used by non-native and native English teachers in terms of their structural and functional types. Similarly, non-native and native English teachers relied heavily in using verb phrase. Both teachers performed lexical bundles that incorporate verb phrase fragments the most. In relation to the functional types of lexical bundles, non-native and native English teachers relied heavily in using lexical bundles as stance expressions. Both teachers performed lexical bundles as stance expressions the most.
This finding is in line with the findings of the study conducted by Kwon and Lee (2014). It is said that similarly, stance expressions is the most frequent lexical bundles employed by both native and non-native English teachers. Unlike the study conducted by Heng, Kashiha and Tan (2014) and Kashiha and Tan (2015) that found discourse organizers as the most prevalent bundles used by non-native and native English teachers, this present study discovered that stance bundles are the most bundles used by both teachers. It happened because in the case of English teaching, the teachers mostly used the bundles to express their intention especially when they are going to explain the materials, to show obligations that students have to do, and to express ability.
In this study, both teachers performed lexical bundles that incorporate verb phrase fragments such as I'll give you, you're going to, let's take a look, take a look at, who wants to and what do you think. Functionally, both teachers performed lexical bundles as stance expressions such as you're going to, I'll give you and who wants to.
There were also some differences found in the study. Structurally, non-native English teachers used more "1st/2nd person pronoun + VP fragment", while native English teachers performed more "WH-questions fragments". Non-native English teachers performed high proportion of the pronoun "you" (e.g. you have to, you're going to, you can make, you can work, you can do), while native English teachers performed more "WH-questions fragments" such as who wants to, who is next, what is this, what do you think.
Functionally, non-native English teachers used more attitudinal/modality stance that shows ability (e.g. you can make, you can go, you can work, you can use), while native English teachers performed more attitudinal/modality stance that shows intention/prediction such as you will see, we're going to, you're going to and I'll give you.

The Relationship between Structural and Functional Types of Lexical Bundles used by Non-Native and Native English Teachers
The findings of this study showed that there is a close relationship between the structures of lexical bundles and the functions they serve. Both teachers performed lexical bundles with verb phrase structures that functioned as stance expressions. The findings are similar to the findings of the study conducted by Biber et al. (2004) and Heng, Kashiha and Tan (2014). Biber et al. (2004) studied lexical bundles on conversation. They claimed that there was a close relationship between structures of functional bundles and the functions they serve. Heng, Kashiha and Tan (2014) also support the findings that students in the group discussion corpus tended to use more verb phrase structures that functioned as stance expressions. There was a great use of bundles like I would like to and I agree with you to show personal expressions of attitudes and desires.
In this study, the bundles you have to, we need to, you need to, belonged to verb phrase fragments and functioned as stance expressions, especially expressing personal obligation.

CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analysis and discussion of this present study, there are some conclusions that can be drawn. Structurally, non-native and native English teachers performed lexical bundles in form of verb phrase, dependent clause and noun phrase and prepositional phrase. However, they used verb phrase fragments the most.
Similarly, both teachers employed lexical bundles in form of verb phrase. Functionally, they both performed lexical bundles as stance expressions. Yet, even though both groups of teachers employed the same structure and function, they are different in terms of the subcategories.
There is a close relationship between the structures of lexical bundles and the function they serve. Frequently, lexical bundles in form of verb phrase can function as stance expressions.
The conclusions explained above lead the researchers to provide some suggestions. In the teaching and learning process, it is important for teachers to use lexical bundles in the talk as well as to raise their awareness in performing the correct bundles structurally and functionally. The use of lexical bundles in the talk will facilitate the acquisition process of the students. It is also obligatory for non-native teachers to adopt some bundles performed by the native English teacher to make their talk sound natural and fluent.
This present study still has weaknesses since it only focused on the use of lexical bundles in spoken discourse especially in nonnative and native English teachers' talk. It might be possible for other researchers to conduct similar study in spoken discourse with different object of the study, such as casual conversation, debate competition, or oral presentation. Furthermore, the subjects of this study were Indonesian teachers and native teachers. It is also possible to compare non-native English teachers from other countries to other native teachers.