The particular dialect or language that a person chooses to use on any occasion is called a code 1559 Copyright © 2024 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 13, Number 1, June 2025 pp. 1559 - 1574 A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis in “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri1, Hayu Dian Yulistianti2 1,2English Education Department, Universitas Islam Nahdlatul Ulama Jepara, Indonesia Corresponding E-Mail: 211320000589@unisnu.ac.id1 Received: 2025-05-15 Accepted: 2025-06-26 DOI: 10.24256/ideas. v13i1.6670 Abstract This study investigates the use of grammatical cohesive devices in reading passages from the textbook English Student Learning Activities for VIII Grade published by MGMP Jepara Team. Drawing on the cohesion theory of (M.A.K and Hasan 1975), the researcher employed a descriptive qualitative method to analyze 13 texts, including dialogues, recounts, and descriptive passages. The analysis identified 281 instances of cohesive devices across four categories: reference (190), conjunction (85), substitution (4), and ellipsis (2), with reference being the most frequently used. Although the texts demonstrate linguistic clarity and coherence, the heavy reliance on reference and limited use of other cohesive devices suggest a narrow range of linguistic structures. This lack of variety may reduce opportunities for students to engage in deeper syntactic and semantic processing, thereby limiting the texts’ potential to support the development of critical thinking skills. The findings highlight the importance of diverse cohesive strategies in instructional materials aimed at fostering higher-order cognitive abilities. Keywords: critical thinking; cohesive devices; textbook analysis. http://u.lipi.go.id/1457703302 mailto:211320000589@unisnu.ac.id1 Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri, Hayu Dian Yulistianti A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis In “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade 1560 Introduction Textbooks serve as essential resources in educational settings, not only conveying subject matter but also modeling language use and textual organization for students. To be effective, the content and materials included must be appropriate for the students’ language proficiency and cognitive levels. Beyond delivering knowledge, textbooks should also promote critical thinking by presenting texts that encourage analysis, reasoning, and interpretation. Critical thinking represents a purposeful cognitive process where clarity guides systematic mental operations including problem-solving, decision-making, persuasion, assumption evaluation, and scientific inquiry. (Putri, Roza, and Maimunah 2020) One effective strategy to cultivate these skills is through the use of textbooks that demonstrate clear language management, well-constructed sentences, and logically organized ideas. In Indonesia, a variety of textbooks are developed to align with the national curriculum. Among these, English language textbooks are especially significant, as English is a compulsory subject in secondary education. These textbooks often include reading passages intended to function as primary tools for language acquisition. English language textbooks utilize reading passages as vital instructional instruments for language acquisition. These texts serve as fundamental components of language functioning as a communicative medium for learners. Hence, it should be coherent and understandable. (Sari, Mujiyanto, and Rukmini 2022) In this research, the author analyzes the “English Students Learning Activities” textbook for VIII grade students written by English MGMP Jepara Team to identify various kinds of cohesive devices that can be found in the texts. There are several studies that discuss about cohesive devices analysis. A study conducted by (Hizbullah, Putra, and Idayani 2022) discusess about cohesive devices analysis in one of Barack Obama’s speech. It shows that in the speech the most frequent device used is reference. On the other hand, there’s a study by (Amaelia and Maulidhawati 2021) that also discusses about grammatical cohesive analysis. In this study, the researchers were analyzing web blog diary report from overseas students. The result of the study shows that the most common devices used in the web blog are references and conjunction. Furthermore, a study from (Ariwibowo et al. 2023) shows that cohesive devices also can be found in students’ writing, which are reference, conjunction, and ellipsis. In most studies including this one, ellipsis is usually being the less used device by authors. The study from (Latifah and Triyono 2020) which also discusses about the same topic shows that the most used grammatical cohesive device is conjunction, while the less used is substitution. As stated by (Sandra Putri Astariani 2020), substitution is a cohesive device employed in language to avoid unnecessary repetition of words or phrases. This grammatical technique involves replacing previously mentioned elements with substitute forms, allowing writers and IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 1561 speakers to maintain clear reference while creating more elegant and concise text. In addition, there is a study from (Indriani, Maharani, and Putra 2021) that analyze the grammatical cohesion in “The Yak” magazine. Unlike other studies, the result of this research only shows two types of grammatical cohesive devices, namely conjunction and reference. Therefore, the other devices such as substitution and ellipsis were not found in the magazine. Previous researches have explored cohesive devices across diverse media, including books, magazines, speeches, song lyrics, and film narratives, highlighting their crucial role in enhancing text comprehensibility. However, there remains a gap in research concerning how the grammatical cohesion of texts within Indonesian school textbooks contributes to, or hinders, the development of students’ critical thinking skills. While most existing analyses have focused primarily on identifying cohesive device types and assessing textual coherence, this study takes a more purposeful pedagogical approach. The researcher examines cohesive devices within school textbook reading passages specifically to evaluate their effectiveness in fostering critical thinking skills among students. Additionally, this research aims to provide constructive feedback to textbook authors regarding the deliberate incorporation of varied vocabulary and cohesive mechanisms that can challenge students' analytical capabilities when interpreting dialogues and texts. This targeted analysis bridges the gap between linguistic coherence and educational efficacy in instructional materials. Method This study employed a descriptive qualitative approach to analyze grammatical cohesive devices in selected reading materials from the English Students Learning Activities for VIII Grade textbook, developed by the English MGMP Team Jepara. A qualitative method was chosen because it enables an in- depth, context-sensitive analysis of linguistic features and their pedagogical implications—insights that cannot be fully captured through quantitative or statistical techniques alone. The research corpus consisted of 13 reading passages, purposefully selected based on their instructional role in the textbook. Only texts specifically designed for reading comprehension were included; texts found in grammar exercises or activity sections were excluded. The selected passages comprised 5 dialogues, 7 descriptive texts, and 1 recount text, representing the range of genres typically encountered by students in the curriculum. The analysis followed a systematic procedure. First, all grammatical cohesive devices in each text were identified and marked. Second, the devices were classified into four categories based on (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) cohesion theory: reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction. Third, the frequency of each type was Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri, Hayu Dian Yulistianti A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis In “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade 1562 calculated to identify patterns of use across the corpus. Finally, the results were interpreted to assess how the use of these cohesive devices may contribute to or limit the development of students’ critical thinking skills. This methodological design allowed for both detailed linguistic analysis and a pedagogical evaluation of the role of cohesion in promoting higher-order thinking in educational materials. Results Grammatical Cohesive Devices in Textbook The analysis of the English Students Learning Activities for VIII Grade textbook revealed three types of texts included in the reading passages: descriptive texts, recount texts, and conversational dialogues. All texts demonstrated a coherent sentence structure and were generally easy to follow, due largely to the appropriate use of grammatical cohesive devices. The analysis identified a total of 281 grammatical cohesive devices, distributed across four categories: reference, conjunction, substitution, and ellipsis. The presence and frequency of these cohesive devices provide insight into the overall textual coherence and the linguistic strategies used to support comprehension. The strategic deployment of cohesive devices serves as a significant indicator of overall writing quality and textual sophistication. (Islami, Saleh, and Linggar Bharati 2022) This section presents the findings regarding four primary cohesive devices found in the textbook: reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction. The distribution and functional application of these devices demonstrate how textual coherence is maintained across different sections. Table 1 summarizes the distribution of the devices. Table 1. Grammatical Cohesive Devices in the textbook Cohesive Devices Amount Percentage Reference Conjunction Substitution Ellipsis 190 85 4 2 67% 30% 2% 1% Total 281 100% Reference Reference is the most frequently used cohesive device, with 190 occurrences (67%), making it the dominant strategy for maintaining cohesion in the texts. This includes 186 instances of personal reference (e.g., he, they, it) and 4 instances of demonstrative reference (e.g., this, those). The heavy reliance on reference indicates the textbook’s emphasis on continuity and clarity, helping students track participants and concepts across sentences without unnecessary repetition. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 1563 However, this dominance may also limit opportunities for students to engage with more diverse cohesion strategies, potentially constraining deeper syntactic and critical reasoning development. Conjunction Conjunctions account for 85 instances (30%), making them the second most common cohesive device. These were further categorized as follows: a. Additive: 44 occurrences (e.g., and, moreover), b. Adversative: 9 occurrences (e.g., but, however), c. Causal: 6 occurrences (e.g., because, so), d. Temporal: 26 occurrences (e.g., then, after that). The high frequency of conjunctions reflects the textbook’s effort to guide logical and temporal relationships between ideas. These devices play a crucial role in maintaining cohesion between sentences and clauses, which in turn helps learners understand cause-effect relationships, contrasts, and sequences— critical for both language comprehension and higher-order thinking. Substitution Substitution is used sparingly, with only 4 occurrences (2%). This includes: a. Nominal substitution: 3 instances, b. Clausal substitution: 1 instance. The minimal use of substitution may reflect the textbook’s preference for explicitness and clarity. While substitution reduces redundancy, it also demands more inferencing skills from readers—a key aspect of critical thinking. Its limited use suggests a missed opportunity to challenge students' inferential and contextual reasoning abilities. Ellipsis Ellipsis appears only 2 times (1%), consisting of: a. Clausal ellipsis: 1 instance, b. Verbal ellipsis: 1 instance. Similar to substitution, ellipsis is typically found more often in informal spoken or narrative discourse where brevity is favored. Its near absence in the textbook aligns with the formal and didactic tone of instructional texts, which prioritize full sentence structures for clarity. However, this also reduces exposure to authentic language structures that require contextual interpretation, an important skill in real-world communication and critical reading. Visual Representation The overall distribution of grammatical cohesive devices is also illustrated in the following chart: Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri, Hayu Dian Yulistianti A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis In “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade 1564 Fiqure 1. Grammatical Cohesive Devices Analysis Chart The findings of this study align with the study by (Sari et al. 2022), who analyzed reading texts in the "Bahasa Inggris" textbook and found a heavy reliance on references (622 instances) and conjunctions (236 instances), with minimal use of substitutions (15 instances) and ellipses (22 instances). This suggests a consistent pattern of limited cohesive device variety in educational materials. The predominant use of basic cohesive devices—such as the frequent reliance on "and" for additive conjunctions and "but" for adversative conjunctions—in the analyzed textbook passages may inadvertently constrain students' exposure to diverse linguistic structures. A limited range of cohesive devices can restrict students' ability to form complex connections between ideas, thereby impeding the development of higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation Distribution Across Text Types Further analysis revealed variations in the distribution of cohesive devices across different types of reading passages: 1. Descriptive texts Descriptive text presents readers with detailed information about subjects like people, animals, objects, and places. This writing style offers clear explanations that help readers form a mental image and gain understanding of the described subject. When authors use descriptive text, they aim to provide thorough information that allows readers to visualize unfamiliar subjects. Through careful explanation of key details, descriptive writing creates a clear picture in the reader's mind. The primary purpose of such text is to convey knowledge and foster understanding about the described subject. (Purnamasari, Hidayat, and Kurniawati 2021) These exhibited the highest frequency of conjunctions, 67% 30% 2% 1% Grammatical Cohesive Devices Reference Conjunction Substitution Ellipsis IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 1565 especially causal and additive types, supporting the explanation of complex concepts through clear logical connections. For example: “I am an English teacher and I have a big family.” The word "and" signifies the addition of an information about the author’s personal life. This conjunction appears predominantly in descriptive texts because such narratives typically contain numerous events and information described by the writer. Thus, based on the analysis, additive conjunction represents the highest percentage of cohesive devices present in the book. 2. Recount Text Recount text represents written material intended to narrate the author's personal experiences. This textual form communicates individual encounters, which might include significant memories, sorrowful events, joyful occasions, vacation experiences, interactions with celebrities, and various other personal occurrences. (Fakhrurriana and Herdina 2024) The stories included in the textbook showed a balanced use of cohesive devices, with particular emphasis on temporal conjunctions to sequence events and personal references to track characters. For example: “Then, our group started to work.” The temporal connector "then" in syntactic constructions signifies chronological progression where one event follows the completion of a prior event. This linguistic marker assists learners in cognitively organizing and comprehending the sequential arrangement of narrative events, thereby facilitating improved understanding of causal and temporal relationships within textual narratives. 3. Dialogues Dialogue is closely connected to how people use language to build relationships and interact with others, as explained in systemic functional linguistics. Within dialogic or conversational discourse, participants engage in continuous negotiation and co-construction of meaning through linguistic choices such as mood, modality, and speech functions. This process reflects not only the exchange of information but also the establishment of roles, attitudes, and interpersonal dynamics, highlighting the fundamentally social nature of language use in dialogic contexts. (Sugianto, Prasetyo, and Asti 2022) These featured more personal references and additive conjunctions, facilitating detailed characterizations of subjects and concepts. For example: Muhammad : “What do you think of Sekar, Aisyah?” Aisyah : “Sekar always sings, but when she sings, she cannot sing beautifully.” The pronoun 'she' is used here to refer to Sekar, illustrating how reference Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri, Hayu Dian Yulistianti A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis In “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade 1566 helps avoid unnecessary repetition of names or entities. The reference can be found in both dialogues and reading passages in the textbook. However, they tend to appear more frequently in conversational dialogue involving two or more participants. Reference, as a cohesive device in discourse, contributes to the clarity and flow of communication by linking ideas within and across sentences. It can be personal, demonstrative, or comparative, and its correct use ensures that listeners or readers can easily track the subjects being discussed without confusion. (Sunjayanto Masykuri, Sukarni, and Dewi 2022) Discussion Types of Grammatical Cohesive Devices 1. Conjunction Conjunction is a linguistic device that indicates the logical relationship between ideas, specifying how the upcoming part of a text is systematically connected to the preceding content. It helps organize discourse by linking clauses, sentences, or larger sections of text, thereby guiding the reader or listener through the flow of information. Conjunctions can express various types of relationships such as addition, contrast, cause-effect, or time sequence, contributing to the overall cohesion and clarity of the communication. (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) Conjunctions that were found in the analyzed passages are 85 instances representing 30% of the total. This suggests that the textbook authors heavily rely on conjunctions to establish logical connections between ideas and ensure text continuity for 8th grade readers. The conjunctions identified in the texts can be further classified into several subcategories: a. Additive conjunctions (e.g., "and," "also," "in addition"): An additive conjunction serves the purpose of introducing additional information that complements or expands upon the main idea of the text. By linking related points or details, it helps to reinforce and emphasize the topic being discussed, thereby enhancing the overall coherence and clarity of the text. (Amayreh and Bin Abdullah 2022) Their prevalence indicates the texts' emphasis on building cumulative information suitable for the cognitive development of 8th grade students. The examples: - "I take ablution water and pray Subuh." - "I always go jogging in the morning. I also practice badminton regularly." - "You should start from the easiest material. One more, you should not memorize all things." - IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 1567 In the first example, the conjunction 'and' functions to add another activity to those already performed by the writer. In the second example, the use of the adverb 'also' serves as an additive cohesive device, indicating that the speaker is providing supplementary information. Specifically, the speaker conveys to the listener that, in addition to jogging, he regularly engages in playing badminton. In the third example, the conjunction 'one more' functions as an additive device, providing additional information or advice from the speaker to the listener. The above examples demonstrate the varied use of additive conjunctions. Nevertheless, 'and' appears to be the most frequently used form in both spoken dialogues and written texts, while conjunctions like 'also' and others occur less commonly. b. Adversative conjunctions (e.g., "but," "however," "nevertheless"): The core meaning of an adversative relation involves expressing a contrast or opposition that goes against what one might normally expect. This expectation can stem either from the logical content of the message itself or from assumptions made during the communication process, such as the flow of conversation or the speaker’s intent. (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) These highlighting the introduction of contrasting ideas and encouraging critical thinking among students. The examples from the textbook are: - "It is difficult to read English fluently and correctly. But, I'm happy that Bambang is still studies." - "I have searched it but I haven't found it." The two examples above illustrate the use of the conjunction but, which functions to signal a contrast with the preceding sentence or statement. Although there are various types of adversative conjunctions, this book exclusively employs but to express contrastive relationships. Other common adversative conjunctions such as however, yet, or nevertheless are not present. Thus, but is the only adversative conjunction used across all text types in the book. c. Causal conjunctions (e.g., "because," "so," "therefore"): Causal conjunctions serve as explicit linguistic markers that link two clauses by establishing a cause-and-effect relationship between them. Specifically, they connect a clause that presents the reason or cause with another clause that conveys the resulting outcome or consequence. These conjunctions help readers or listeners understand the logical relationship between ideas, enhancing the coherence and clarity of the text. Common examples include words such as because, since, therefore, and as a result, each of which signals that one event or statement directly influences or leads to another. (Boboeva Z.H. 2025) These devices help establish cause-effect relationships, supporting the development of logical reasoning skills. Some of the examples from the book are: Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri, Hayu Dian Yulistianti A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis In “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade 1568 - "My mom is sick, so I have to take care of her now." - "We get to bed by nine-thirty because we have to get up so early again the next morning." - "I won some swimming competitions at that time, so I had many medals at home." In the first and third examples, the causal conjunction so is used to indicate the effect resulting from the preceding statement. In the first example, the clause 'my mom is sick' functions as the cause, leading to the effect that the speaker must take care of their ill mother. Similarly, in the third example, the statement 'I won some swimming competitions at that time' serves as the cause, with the resulting effect being that the writer now has many medals at home. In the second example, the conjunction because is used to express a causal relationship as well. The writer explains that she had to sleep at 9:30 p.m. because she needed to wake up very early, showing a clear link between the necessity of waking early and the decision to go to bed at that time. The only causal conjunctions found in the reading texts within the book are because and so, indicating a limited variety in the use of causal connectors. d. Temporal conjunctions (e.g., "then," "after," "finally"): A temporal conjunction is used to link clauses or phrases that indicate the timing or sequence of events within a sentence. These conjunctions help establish a clear chronological relationship between two actions or occurrences. By employing temporal conjunctions, speakers and writers can show whether events happen simultaneously, consecutively, or in relation to one another over time. Common examples of temporal conjunctions include when, while, as soon as, and before. (Putri, Saragih, and Rudianto 2024) These help sequence events and processes, making complex information more accessible to 8th grade readers. The examples from the textbook are: - "We'll discuss it after we have some members." - "First of all, I have a shower and brush my teeth." - "After that, I put on my clothes on then eat a plate of fried rice for breakfast." - "Finally, I read in bed for a few minutes before I fall asleep." Unlike other types of conjunctions, temporal conjunctions display a relatively high degree of variety, with examples such as after, after that, finally, first of all, and then appearing in the text. This diversity is pedagogically beneficial, as it not only enriches students’ vocabulary but also encourages them to develop a more structured understanding of time relationships in discourse. Exposure to a range of temporal markers can help learners sequence events more effectively and enhance their ability to IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 1569 comprehend and produce coherent narratives, ultimately supporting critical thinking and language development. 2. Reference Reference devices appeared 190 times throughout the analyzed passages, accounting for 67% of the total cohesive devices. These references help maintain text cohesion by connecting related information across sentences and paragraphs. The analysis revealed two main types of references: a. Personal references: Personal reference refers to the use of pronouns or similar expressions to identify participants in a speech situation based on their roles or functions within that context. This type of reference typically involves personal pronouns such as I, you, he, she, we, and they, which are used to point to people or entities involved in the communication. Rather than naming the referent directly, personal references rely on the listener's or reader’s understanding of the situation to interpret who or what is being referred to. This cohesive device plays a crucial role in maintaining clarity and avoiding repetition in both spoken and written discourse. (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) The example can be seen below: - "My husband, Michael, usually makes dinner because he loves to cook." - "My brother, Revan, has so many toys at home. He played the toys daily when he was a child." - "Then our group started to work. We prepared all the parts first." In the first example, the pronoun he is used to refer to Michael, while in the second example, he similarly refers to Revan. In the third example, the pronoun we is employed to represent the speaker’s group. This use of reference not only maintains coherence but also helps the listener or reader focus on the flow of ideas without distraction from redundant wording. b. Demonstrative references: Demonstrative reference is a type of cohesive device in which the speaker or writer 'points' to a specific referent using language, typically through expressions that indicate spatial, temporal, or situational proximity. This form of reference helps identify entities based on how near or distant they are from the speaker's perspective, either physically or contextually. Common demonstratives include words like this, that, these, and those. (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) Some of the examples are: - "I have some Science videos; I have watched all of them. Those videos give me clear explanation about Science." - "My brother Revan has many toy cars at home. He played the toys every day when he was a child. That were his favorite toys." In the first example, the demonstrative pronoun those is used to refer to ‘some Science videos’ that has likely been mentioned previously. This Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri, Hayu Dian Yulistianti A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis In “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade 1570 indicates a plural referent that is somewhat removed in either physical space or discourse distance. In the second example, the demonstrative that refers to toy cars, functioning as a plural form that similarly points to items that are distinguishable in the situational or textual context. However, the use of the demonstrative reference "that" is less precise when referring to plural objects or more than one item. In such cases, the correct demonstrative reference should be "those." This represents one of the grammatical issues that needs greater attention and careful review by writers and textbook editors. These uses of demonstrative reference help the speaker or writer maintain cohesion in discourse by clearly indicating which objects are being referred to, while avoiding unnecessary repetition of nouns. Unfortunately, the use of demonstrative reference in the reading passages in the textbook is limited, suggesting a lack of variety in demonstrating this important cohesive device. This minimal usage may reduce opportunities for learners to observe how demonstratives function in different contexts to maintain coherence and clarity in discourse. 3. Ellipsis The analyzed passages contained 2 instances of ellipsis (1% of all cohesive devices). Ellipsis occurs when elements are omitted from the text but can be recovered from the context, creating a more concise and natural flow. The discussion of ellipsis often begins with the commonly understood idea that it involves the omission of certain elements from a sentence that are not explicitly stated but are still understood from the context. In other words, ellipsis allows speakers or writers to leave out information that is either repeated or easily inferable by the listener or reader. (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) It plays a vital role in cohesive discourse, particularly in spoken language, where brevity and contextual understanding are often prioritized. There are three types of ellipsis, namely; a) nominal ellipsis, b) verbal ellipsis, and c) clausal ellipsis. The reading passages in the book contain only two types of ellipsis: verbal and clausal ellipsis. The examples are: - Zahra : “Are you using somebody’s phone? This is not your phone number, right?” Nafilah : “No, it isn’t […]. I’m using my mother’s phone.” In this sentence, if ellipsis were not used, the full version would be: 'No, it is not my phone number.' The type of ellipsis used in this example is clausal ellipsis in which an entire clause is omitted, but its meaning is understood from the context. In clausal ellipsis, the missing clause is typically inferred from the previous part of the sentence or conversation, making the communication more efficient by removing redundant information. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 1571 - Hasna : “I want to tell you that I will hold a birthday party tomorrow. Would you like to come?” Reza : “Unfortunately, I can’t […]. My mom is sick, so I have to take care of her now.” The sentence that would be complete without the use of ellipsis is ‘Unfortunately, I can’t come. My mom is sick, so I have to take care of her now.' In this case, the ellipsis functions by omitting part of the sentence, specifically the verb 'come,' which is understood from the context. The type of ellipsis used here is verbal ellipsis, where a verb or verbal phrase is left out because it can be inferred from the preceding or following context. This type of ellipsis helps streamline communication by removing redundant information without losing clarity. The limited use of ellipsis may reflect a pedagogical choice to maintain explicit language in educational materials for this age group, avoiding potential comprehension challenges that could arise from omitted information. 4. Substitution A total of 4 instances of substitution were identified in the reading passages of the textbook, accounting for approximately 2% of all grammatical cohesive devices. This involved the replacement of a linguistic element with a substitute word to avoid repetition while maintaining meaning. There are three types of substitution, those are; nominal substitution, verbal substitution, and clausal substitution. Nominal substitution involves replacing a noun phrase with the words one or ones, which act as substitutes for the head of the nominal group. This substitution can only occur when the item being replaced is the main noun or head within a nominal group. (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) For example, in the sentence, 'I shoot the hippo with bullets made of platinum. Because if I use leaden ones, his hide is sure to flatten 'em,' the word ones substitutes for 'bullets,' which is the head of the nominal group. This form of substitution helps to avoid repetition, making the sentence more concise while maintaining clarity. In English, the verbal substitute is do. It functions as the head of a verbal group, replacing the lexical verb, and it always occupies the final position within the group. For example, in the sentence 'The words did not come the same as they used to do,' the word do substitutes for the main verb, ensuring the sentence remains clear without repeating the full verbal phrase. (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) Another type of substitution occurs when the item being replaced is not just a word or phrase within a clause, but an entire clause itself. In such cases, the substitutes so and not are commonly used. For example, in the brief dialogue: 'If you've seen them so often, of course you know what they like.' — 'I believe so,' the word so Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri, Hayu Dian Yulistianti A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis In “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade 1572 stands in for the entire clause 'that I know what they like.' This form of substitution helps to avoid repetition while maintaining coherence in conversation. (M.A.K and Hasan 1975) The example of substitution found in the book is a clausal substitution, which occurs in the following dialogue: - Zahra: “One more, you should not memorize all things. Just try to remember them.” Nafilah: “I think so.” In this exchange, the word so is used by Nafilah to substitute for the entire clause 'that I should not memorize all things, just try to remember them,' which Zahra previously stated. This type of substitution is effective in avoiding redundancy and contributes to a more natural and efficient flow of conversation. Although brief, this example demonstrates how clausal substitution can be used to maintain cohesion in discourse by referencing an entire preceding idea without restating it in full. The minimal use of substitution suggests that textbook authors prefer explicit repetition or reference over substitution for clarity and accessibility to 8th grade readers. Conclusion This study's analysis of grammatical cohesive devices in 8th grade textbook reading passages reveals a concerning imbalance, with reference dominating (67%) while conjunction (30%), ellipsis (1%), and substitution (2%) appear less frequently, creating a simplified linguistic environment that fails to challenge students' critical thinking abilities. To address this issue, educational stakeholders should: expand the variety of conjunctive devices by incorporating more sophisticated connectives; create a more balanced distribution of cohesive mechanisms; develop progressive complexity throughout textbooks; provide teachers with resources explaining the importance of cohesive variety; establish guidelines for textbook developers that specify appropriate ranges of cohesive devices; incorporate authentic texts from various genres; and conduct classroom- based research to evaluate how students respond to materials with more varied cohesive strategies. These adjustments would create a more linguistically rich learning environment that better prepares students for the complex reasoning demands of higher education while enhancing their analytical skills through natural engagement with more sophisticated textual connections. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 1573 References Amaelia, F., and R. Maulidhawati. 2021. “Grammatical Cohesion Found On The Web Blog Diary Report Of Students Teaching Practice Overseas In Universitas PGRI Semarang: A Study Of Discourse Analysis.” 245–52. Amayreh, Khaled Salem Ahmad, and Ahmad Taufik Hidayah Bin Abdullah. 2022. “Conjunction In Expository Essay Writing By Jordanian Undergraduate Students Studying English As A Foreign Language (EFL).” International Research Journal on Advanced Science Hub 4(02):24–30. DOI: 10.47392/Irjash.2022.006. Ariwibowo, Tungky, Didin Nuruddin Hidayat, Nida Husna, Alek Alek, and Agus Sufyan. 2023. “A Discourse Analysis Of Cohesion Devices In Students’ Writing Of Recount Text.” Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains Sosial, Dan Agama 9(1):22–32. DOI: 10.53565/Pssa.V9i1.687. Boboeva Z.H. 2025. “SEMANTICO-FUNCTIONAL PECULIARITIES OF CAUSAL CONJUNCTIONS IN TAJIK AND ENGLISH: A COMPARATIVE OVERVIEW.” International Research Journal On Advanced Science Hub 1(151):1–6. Fakhrurriana, Ria, and Griseldis Faden Herdina. 2024. “Assessment Test Of Receptive Skills: Listening And Reading Comprehension Of Recount Text Using AI Platform (Atomic Learning).” 3(3):6. Furwana, D., Muin, F. R., Zainuddin, A. A., & Mulyani, A. G. (2024). Unlocking the Potential: Exploring the Impact of Online Assessment in English Language Teaching. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 12(1), 653-662. Hizbullah, 1) 1)Faroz, H. Putra, and 2) Andi Idayani. 2022. “An Analysis of Grammatical Cohesion Found in Barack Obama’s Speech.” Discovery Journal 1(1):23–29. Husnaini, H. (2022). Development of Self-Esteem-Oriented Micro-Teaching Materials for IAIN Palopo English Education Students. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(1), 538-560. Indriani, Kadek Yulia, Putu Devi Maharani, and Gusti Bagus Wahyu Nugraha Putra. 2021. “The Grammatical Cohesion Used In "The Yak" Magazine.” ELYSIAN JOURNAL: English Literature, Linguistics, and Translation Studies 1(2):68–76. Ismayanti, D., & Syam, A. T. (2022). The Community Manipulation Through Big Brother's Tyranny in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(2), 1556-1569. Islami, Kifti Halimah, Mursid Saleh, and Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati. 2022. “The Use Of Cohesive Devices In Descriptive Text By English Training Participants At PST.” English Education Journal 12(1):96–103. DOI: 10.15294/Eej.V12i1.49052. Ardellia Ananda Eka Fitri, Hayu Dian Yulistianti A Grammatical Cohesive Analysis In “English Students Learning Activities” Textbook for VIII Grade 1574 Latifah, Ani, and Sulis Triyono. 2020. “Cohesion and Coherence of Discourse in the Story of ‘Layangan Putus’ on Social Media Facebook.” Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics 5(1):41. DOI: 10.21462/Ijefl.V5i1.215. M.A.K. Halliday and R. Hasan. 1975. “Cohesion in English Halliday and Hasan.” Longman. Purnamasari, Dewi, Didin Nuruddin Hidayat, and Lia Kurniawati. 2021. “An Analysis Of Students’ Writing Skill On English Descriptive Text.” English Education: Jurnal Tadris Bahasa Inggris 14(1):101–14. DOI: 10.24042/Ee- Jtbi.V14i1.7943. Putri, Anike, Yenita Roza, and Maimunah Maimunah. 2020. “Development Of Learning Tools With The Discovery Learning Model To Improve The Critical Thinking Ability Of Mathematics.” Journal of Educational Sciences 4(1):83. DOI: 10.31258/Jes.4.1.P.83-92. Putri, Dwina, Ayu Saragih, and Gaguk Rudianto. 2024. “ANALYSIS OF CONJUNCTIONS ON ‘JIMMY FALLON THE TONIGHT SHOW WITH GIGI HADID.’” 7(4):882–89. Sandra Putri Astariani, Putu. 2020. “The Analysis Of Cohesive Devices Found In Good-Bye.” Udayana Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (UJOSSH) 4(1):41. DOI: 10.24843/Ujossh.2020.V04.I01.P08. Sari, Alifia Junita Cendraa, Januarius Mujiyanto, and Dwi Rukmini. 2022. “Assessing The Use Of Cohesive Devices In Reading Texts Of English Textbook.” English Education Journal 12(2):264–73. DOI: 10.15294/Eej.V12i2.56996. Sugianto, Ahmad, Ilham Agung Prasetyo, and Widy Asti. 2022. “‘Is The Picture Worth A Thousand Words?’: The Interpersonal Meanings Of A Dialogue In An EFL Textbook.” Journal of Languages and Language Teaching 10(2):187. DOI: 10.33394/Jollt.V10i2.4510. Sunjayanto Masykuri, Edi, Semi Sukarni, And Puspa Dewi. 2022. “The Cohesive Device in Hiver.com and Its Implication In Teaching Online Writing The Cohesive Devices In Hiver.Com And Its Implication In Teaching Online Writing Perangkat Kohesif Dalam Hiver.Com Dan Implikasinya Dalam Pengajaran Menulis Online The Cohesiv.” 1(2):124–35.