The Use of Structures and Functions of Lexical Bundles in Conversation Texts in Bahasa Inggris Textbook Published By

_____________ Abstract _______________________________________________ This study investigated the use of structures of lexical bundles, functions of lexical bundles, and the relationship between structures and functions of bundles in conversation texts. For the purposes of the study, the BahasaInggris textbook, published by the Ministry of Education and Culture(2018), was chosen to be analyzed. In the process of collecting the data, a set of tables was used. The first table was used to collect data to analyze structures of lexical bundles based on Biber's (2006) theory. The second table was used to collect data regarding Biber and Conrad's (2005) theory for functions of lexical bundles. Procedures for analyzing data consisted of steps, including reading, categorizing, and analyzing. This study revealed that, firstly, personal pronoun + lexical VP (e.g. we are going to) identified as the most frequent structure of bundle appeared in the conversation texts.Secondly, stance expression had a high proportion of the most recurring function of the bundle. They are used for expressing desire, intention, ability, obligation, and showing certain and uncertain feelings. Moreover, there were relationships between the functions of bundles with particular structures. In conclusion, improving the


INTRODUCTION
As the primary goal of English learning, communicative competence can be developed through some competencies. One of them is formulaic competence. Celce-Murcia (2007) defines it as fixed and prefabricated chunks used frequently in actual conversation among English native speakers. It can be said that it is the ability to using many expressions which are occurred commonly in English native speakers' interactions. This research focused on lexical bundles in terms of structures and functions categories as one kind of formulaic competence. Biber et al. (1999) said that "producing natural English is not just a matter of constructing well-formed sentences but of using well-tried lexical expressions inappropriate places." Therefore, fluent speakers of a language draw on the lexical expression of the target language as often as they use systemic linguistic knowledge.
Further, introducing many formulaic expressions to the students can also help students create cohesive and coherent texts. Lewis (2008) explains that language consists do not only consist of grammar and vocabulary but also formulaic expressions such as lexical bundles that can produce a coherent text when they are combined. It can be said that the formulaic expressions enable students to create a cohesive text easily when they have many prefabricated chunks.
Since lexical bundles play an essential role in achieving communicative competence, it should be introduced to the students in the classroom. By introducing appropriate lexical bundles to the students, the students are expected to use appropriate utterances in their interaction. However, as a fact, in EFL contexts, it is not easy to equip learners with lexical bundles because, in EFL settings, English is taught as a foreign language, and most often, the students do not use English in their daily lives.
Their exposure to the English language is limited to their English classes with non-native teachers and the textbooks authorized by the Ministry of Education. Therefore, as Razmjoo (2007) asserts, books are a necessary resource for foreign language learning that has the primary role in teaching and learning a foreign language. However, as Gholami, Rimaninikou, and Soultanpour (2012) claim, no textbook can be perfect; hence, the teachers should select the textbook appropriately to clarify the sources' suitability and find the best one, as well as in selecting English Textbook.
Another context is lexical bundles on the spoken register (Darweesh and Ali, 2017;and Colle and Fitriani, 2018) and the study of the cognitive skill of English textbook has been done by Hayati, Djufri, and Fitrawati (2012), Yati (2014), and Muchlis (2015). However, studies of lexical bundles in an English textbook, especially the BahasaInggris textbook published by the Ministry of Education and Culture in Indonesia, have not much done yet. Whereas, knowing the quality of English textbooks that are used as the role models for students in learning English as a foreign language in the classroom is very important.
Thus, in this study, I chose BahasaInggris textbooks because the Ministry of Education and Culture published and used them at senior high schools in Indonesia, which apply the 2013 curriculum. One effective way to know what is being conducted in current English classrooms in Indonesia through the analysis of the authorized textbook, which is created according to the Ministry of Education's guidelines. The books contain examples of conversation texts, and they are used as role models for students in English teaching and learning. For this reason, the conversation texts should reflect the natural spoken language produced by native English speakers or native-like.

METHODS
This study analyzed the manifestation of lexical bundles' structures and functions in the conversational text of the BahasaInggris textbookas one of the students' language models in the classroom in learning English. To accomplish those objectives above, I used discourse analysis since it attempts to explain the use of lexical bundles in the conversational text of BahasaIngggris textbook, published by the Ministry of Education and Culture and used at senior high school. The unit of analysis in this study was clauses and clause complex. In line with the research design, I was a data reporter where I reported the investigation results regarding the structures and functions of lexical bundles found in conversational texts of the BahasaInggris textbook.
In the process of collecting the data, a set of tables was used. These tables were arranged from the framework used to analyze the data. The first table was used for collecting data to analyze structures of lexical bundles based on Biber's (2006) theory. Moreover, the second table was used to collect data regarding Biber and Conrad's (2005) theory for functions of lexical bundles. A document was used as the method of collecting the data. The document was taken from the English Textbook, "BahasaInggris" for Senior High School, written by UtamiWidiati, ZuliatiRohmah, and Furaidah. Some procedures in analyzing data were done, which would be described further as follows: Reading, Categorizing, Analyzing. In this study, I asked one of a lecture at a local university in Semarang to judge the data analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
These results and discussion were divided into three parts. First, the use of structures of lexical bundles in conversation texts in English textbooks. Second, the use of functions of lexical bundles in conversation texts in English textbooks, and the last the relationship between the functions and structures of lexical bundles in conversation texts in English textbooks.

Published by KEMENDIKBUD
Bundles in conversation are the most common parts of declarative clauses and questions, and personal pronoun + lexical VP accounted for the highest number of lexical bundles that appeared. The manifestation of personal pronoun + lexical VP could be seen in the excerpt 1: Excerpt 1 Bayu : What about you, Riri? What would you like to do on the long weekend? Riri : I have made a plan with my mother about what to do on this long weekend. We are going to practice baking cookies. Santi : That sounds like a very good plan! Bayu : Are you going to bake chocochips cookies like the last time? From excerpt 1, Riri used the personal pronoun + lexical VP bundle, namely, we are going to … this bundle carries Riri's prediction concerning her plan on that long weekend where she and her mother are going to practice baking cookies.
This result had a similar result to previous studies in the spoken setting. Kashiha and Chan (2013) explored the use of frequency, structure, and function of lexical bundles in spoken discourse, namely academic lectures from British Academic Spoken English (BASE). The result revealed that the bundle we are going to (personal pronoun + lexical VP) was the most frequent lexical bundle in the corpus, and the second-placed bundle was I am going to (personal pronoun + lexical VP). Since speech relies heavily on a more direct physical context to deliver the meaning or message, lecturers chose those bundles as the preferred simple and straightforward structures to convey their disciplinary lessons. Aini, Faridi, and Fitriati (2018) compare the lexical bundles' frequencies in conversation texts between two English textbook books. The result revealed the conversation texts more frequently in using the lexical bundles that incorporate with verb phrase fragments. In order words, they used a lot of 1st/2ndperson pronoun + VP fragments. Then, Colle and Fitriati (2019) explained the realization of actional competence which proposed by Celce-Murcia et al. (1995) and formulaic competence based on the Biber et al.'s. (2004) theory in teachers' talk. It also explained the relationship between those competencies.
The study's result related to the formulaic competence in terms of lexical bundles showed that English teachers used most frequently 1st/2ndperson pronoun + VP fragment such as You don't know, I think, I want to you. Then, Lorenna, Fitriati, and Widhiyanto (2020) evaluated lexical bundles that occur in non-native and native English teachers' talk. The lexical bundles that happen in the talk are classified according to their structures and functions using the structural and functional taxonomies proposed by Biber et al. (2004). Non-native English teachers used more 1st/2ndpersonpronoun+VP fragments.
Meanwhile, Preposition + NP fragments and NP with post-modifier fragments accounted for the uncommon structure in conversation text on English textbooks. These structures are mainly used in the written register, as mentioned in some researchers such as Bal (2010), Islami, Fitriati, and Mujiyanto (2019), and Wachidah, Fitriati, and Widhiyanto (2020). Bal (2010) identified Turkish scholars' structural and functional features' lexical bundles, who are non-native speakers of English. The academic texts used for the study were published research articles in international journals from six different academic disciplines written by Turkish scholars. This study also showed that the most significant part of the lexical bundles comprises prepositional phrases (PP). The forty-eight lexical bundles in this group were made up of prepositional phrases followed by thirty-three lexical phrases made up of noun phrases.
Examples of these prepositional phrases are in the context of, at the time of, in this study, in line with the, in terms of their Lexical bundles that are formed by noun phrases (NP) are expressions such as the aim of this study, the results of this study, an increase in the, the second half of, and others. Verb phrase (VP)based bundles are relatively rare. Islami, Fitriati, and Mujiyanto (2019) analyzed lexical bundles manifested in 20 Chapter II, Literature Review of students' final projects. The results revealed that the lexical bundle's most structural form in written discourse was a noun phrase with the of-phrase fragment.
It consisted of bundles, such as the result of the, the meaning of the, the purpose of the, the average score of, the objectives of the, the aim of the, and the goal of the. A recent study by Wachidah, Fitriati, and Widhiyanto (2020) analyzed the lexical bundles used in findings and discussion sections of graduate students' thesis in terms of structures and functions. There are 74 lexical bundles found in the students' texts, and the findings revealed that the most dominantly used as a noun phrase with the of-phrase fragment.

Published by KEMENDIKBUD Stance Expressions
The table1 provides the analysis of the function of lexical bundles in terms of stance expressions.

Intention/ prediction
We are going to …, we will also try to …. Ability I will be able to …,, I won't be able to …, I can't go to … Discourse Organizers Referential expressions play an essential role in the identification of functions of lexical bundles. As Biber et al. (2004) state, the bundles in this category "generally identify an entity or single out some particular attribute of an entity as especially important" (p.393). This group has four sub-categories, namely, identification, intangible, tangible, and time reference. Moreover, this study's result showed that only two referential expressions were used, namely identification (one of the) and intangible (in case of).  The data analysis showed thatstance expression performed a high proportion of lexical bundles used in the textbook. They are used for expressing desire, intention, ability, obligation, and showing certain and uncertain feelings. As the names suggest, these lexical bundles express personal attitudes. Related to this result, as Biber and Barbieri (2007) noted in their research, showed that stance expressions as lexical bundles occurred more frequently in conversations. Kashiha and Chan (2013) explored how lexical bundles are used in 24 academic lectures of hard and soft sciences taken from the British Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus to see the possible variations in their frequency, structure, and function. Stance expressions accounted for over 60% of the bundles in their corpora because one of these characteristics commonly observed in academic lectures is the frequent use of selfreference markers to express the lecturers' attitude, including the expression of certainty/uncertainty. It seems to be in line with the previous study by Biber et al. (2004), who found that most epistemic stance bundles in spoken registers, such as conversation and classroom teaching, are used to show personal rather than impersonal engagement. Then, Kwon and Eun's (2014) research findings seem to be shared in a variety of spoken registers research, as Biber et al., (2004), Biber and Barbieri (2007), Kashiha and Chan (2013). All of the researchers reported that in spoken register relied heavily on a narrow range of functional categories, namely, stance expressions, where more than 50 percent of the key lexical bundles were observed. It seems that the high frequency of the stance expressions shows that the teacher talk corpus has the features of the conversational discourse.

Special Function
A recent study by Lorenna, Fitriati, and Widhiyanto (2020) also showed that nonnative English teachers performed lexical bundles as stance expressions the most. They frequently played lexical bundles in showing ability. The teachers mostly used the bundles to express their intention, especially when explaining the materials, showing obligations that students have to do, and expressing ability.

The Relationship between the Functions and Structures of Lexical Bundles in Conversation Texts in BahasaInggris Textbook Published by KEMENDIKBUD
In some cases, there were relationships between the functions of bundles in that particular structures were used to serve a specific purpose. For instance: Stance (ability) and personal pronoun + lexical VP  Table 5 showed I cannot ….was pronoun + lexical VP structure, which was used to produce ability expression.
Stance (desire) and Yes-no fragments

Yes-no fragments
Yes-no fragments structure can be used to form stance bundles as showed in a clause can I ask you something?.
Discourse organizers (topic introduction) and WH-question fragment

WH-question fragments
The use of topic organizers as a kind of discourse organizers bundles could be seen in the clause what do you think?as served in table above. This function bundle was served in the structure of the WH-question fragments.
Discourse organizer (topic elaboration) and Personal pronoun + lexical V Thank you very much could be categorized as (aux+) active Verb (+) structure bundles to perform politeness function bundles.
From those examples, lexical bundles found have structural correlations and strong functional features that help construct the discourse. Lorenna, Fitriati, and Widhiyanto (2020), in their research, also claimed that there was a close relationship between structures of functional bundles and the functions, as supported earlier by Biber et al. (2004) and Heng, Kashiha, and Tan (2014). Lorenna, Fitriati, and Widhiyanto's (2020) study gave an example of the relationship between structural and functions of lexical bundles where nonnative English teachers performed lexical bundles as stance expressions in showing ability by using bundles personal pronoun + lexical VP such as you can make …, you can use ….
Another research that supported this result is Colle and Fitriati (2019). In their research showed that lexical bundles are realized in the language functions. For instance, "1stPP + fragments structure such as you'd better + …, it usually used to perform language function of giving a suggestion. Then, Yes-no question fragments, such as could you …?could perform the language function of requesting. Thus, it can be concluded that there is a close interrelation between structural categories and functions bundles.

CONCLUSION
Bundles found in conversation texts are the most common parts of declarative clauses and questions, and personal pronoun + lexical VP accounted for the highest number of lexical bundles that appeared, such as we are going to … Further, the most functions of the bundle in conversations texts use were the high proportion of stance expression. They are used for expressing desire (I can't wait to), intention (we will also try to), ability (I will be able to), obligation (you should), and showing certain and uncertain feelings (I believe). Moreover, there were relationships between the functions of bundles in that particular structures were used to serve a specific function. For example, the pronoun + lexical VP structure was used to produce an expression of ability.
It issuggested that other researchers in the future can conduct a similar study in spoken discourse. Moreover, future research focuses not only on lexical bundles as part of formulaic competence but also on formulaic competence, such as idioms. Then, to improve the teaching quality, it can be built based on many aspects such as the matched textbook with curriculum or the appropriateness of the textbook. Therefore, the teacher needs to pay attention to the English book that they about to use.