ARTICLE
12 September 2025

初中英语教材中指令语的对比研究—— 以人教版和译林版为例

双青 邓1
Show Less
1 湖南女子学院, 中国
ETR 2025 , 3(37), 47–50; https://doi.org/10.61369/ETR.2025370042
© 2025 by the Author(s). Licensee Art and Design, USA. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Abstract

教材指令语是衔接课程标准与课堂实践的微观接口,直接影响教学任务可行性与思维触发度。本文基于言语行为理论,自建7-9年级闭合语料库(2022人教版与译林版),从结构、语用、认知三维度系统对比指令性话语,发现其差异主要表现为:结构层面,人教版以祈使句为主导,疑问式指令丰富,呈现“问— 答— 做”促思路径;译林版倾向“陈述铺垫+ 祈使落实”,提供/ 促成行为占比高,凸显协作与礼貌取向;语用层面,人教版通过“信息索取- 复述”实现教学效率最大化,译林版则借助“提供- 接受”框架营造协商氛围;认知层面,人教版开放问多样,思维层级略高;译林版借情境叙事隐性承载高阶加工。据此提出“陈述搭台— 问题驱动— 动作显著化”编写模型,为教材二次开发提供可操作指标,并指出需扩大语料、对接学习成效以完善循证链条。

Keywords
教材对比
指令语
言语行为
思维品质
语料库
References

[1] 教育部. 义务教育英语课程标准: 2022 年版[S]. 北京: 人民教育出版社, 2022.
[2]Searle J R. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
[3]Searle J R. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts[M].Cambridge: CUP, 1979.
[4] 何安平. 语料库辅助的基础英语教材分析[J]. 课程. 教材. 教法,2007,(03):44-49.
[5]Austin J L. How to Do Things with Words[M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962.
[6]Searle J R. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1969.
[7]Krathwohl D R. A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview[J]. Theory intoPractice, 2002, 41(4): 212-218.
[8]He A P. Textbook Directives: Regulative, Instructional and MetacognitiveFunctions[J]. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 2007, 39(4): 435-456.
[9]Ren W, Li Y. Instructional Pragmatics in EFL Textbooks: A Comparative Study[J].Journal of Pragmatics, 2018, 131: 1-12.
[10]Myers-Scotton C, Bernstein B. Language and Control in Children'sTextbooks[M]. London: Edward Arnold, 1988.
[11]Chen L. Speech Acts in Junior High School EFL Textbooks in China[J].International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2013, 23(2): 189-208.
[12]Yue Y. Representations of Interpersonal Relationships in EFL Textbooks: ASocial Semiotic Approach[J]. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 2014, 11(3): 179-203.
[13]Tomlinson B. Developing Materials for Language Teaching[M]. 2nd ed. London:Bloomsbury, 2011.
[14]Lee S. A Corpus-based Analysis of Directive Speech Acts in Korean and Chinese Middle School English Textbooks[D]. Seoul: Hankuk University of Foreign Studies,2018.
[15]Ausubel D P. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View[M]. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1978.
[16]Vellenga, Heidi. Learning pragmatic from ESL & EFL textbooks: How likely? [J].Teaching English as a Second Language: Electronic Journal 2004. 8 (2): 16.
[17]Ren, W. & Z. Han. The representation of pragmatic knowledge in recent ELT textbooks [J]. ELT Journal 2016. 70(4): 424-434.
[18]Culpeper J, Archer D. Police Interviews and Spoken English: A Corpus-Based Examination of Directive Speech Acts[J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2018, 128: 1-15.
[19]Hmelo-Silver C E. Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn?[J]. Educational Psychology Review, 2004, 16(3): 235-266.

Share
Back to top