ETREducational Theory and Research2995-34482995-3456Art and Technology10.61369/ETR.2025370042Article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https://artdesignp.com/journal/ETR/3/37/10.61369/ETR.2025370042邓双青20253372025-09-12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。教材对比,指令语,言语行为,思维品质,语料库

[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.