基于Coh-Metrix的译林版与外研社版高中英语教材阅读语篇可读性比较研究
A Comparative Study of the Readability of Reading Texts in Yilin and FLTRP Senior High School English Textbooks Based on Coh-Metrix
摘要: 本研究基于Coh-Metrix 3.0比较译林版与外研社版高中英语教材阅读语篇的可读性。选取两套教材必修第一至第三册、选择性必修第一至第二册核心阅读语篇100篇,其中译林版40篇、外研社版60篇。采用描述性统计、独立样本t检验与典型语篇细读,考察整体可读性、叙事性、句法简约性、词汇具体度及衔接等指标。结果显示,外研社版Flesch Reading Ease和叙事性显著高于译林版,而两版在Coh-Metrix L2 Readability、句法简约性、词汇具体度及多数衔接指标上差异不显著。两套教材从必修到选择性必修阶段均呈可读性下降,且译林版下降幅度更大。个案分析表明,译林版高难度语篇的负荷主要来自长句、抽象概念与跨段整合,外研社版高叙事性语篇则依靠稳定人物和时间–事件链降低理解阻力。研究提示,两版教材差异主要体现在表层可读性、叙事组织与阶段递进方式,教学中应据此配置差异化阅读支架。
Abstract: This study compares the readability of reading texts in Yilin and Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press (FLTRP) senior high school English textbooks using Coh-Metrix 3.0. A total of 100 core reading texts were selected from Compulsory Books 1~3 and Selective Compulsory Books 1~2, including 40 Yilin texts and 60 FLTRP texts. Descriptive statistics, independent-samples t tests, and close reading of representative texts were used to examine overall readability, narrativity, syntactic simplicity, word concreteness, and cohesion. The FLTRP series scored significantly higher in Flesch Reading Ease and narrativity, while the two series did not differ significantly in Coh-Metrix L2 Readability, syntactic simplicity, word concreteness, or most cohesion indices. Readability declined from the compulsory to the selective compulsory stage in both series, with a larger decline in Yilin. Case analyses showed that the higher processing load of difficult Yilin texts mainly stemmed from longer sentences, abstract concepts, and cross-paragraph integration, whereas highly narrative FLTRP texts relied on stable characters and temporal-event chains to reduce comprehension barriers. The findings suggest that the two series differ mainly in surface readability, narrative organization, and progression patterns across stages, calling for differentiated reading scaffolds in classroom instruction.
文章引用:孙燕茹. 基于Coh-Metrix的译林版与外研社版高中英语教材阅读语篇可读性比较研究[J]. 教育进展, 2026, 16(10): 733-744. https://doi.org/10.12677/ae.2026.16102164

参考文献

[1] Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S., Louwerse, M.M. and Cai, Z. (2004) Coh-Metrix: Analysis of Text on Cohesion and Language. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 193-202.
https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03195564
[2] McNamara, D.S., Graesser, A.C., McCarthy, P.M. and Cai, Z. (2014). Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511894664
[3] Crossley, S.A., Greenfield, J. and McNamara, D.S. (2008) Assessing Text Readability Using Cognitively Based Indices. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 475-493.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00142.x
[4] 林颖. 高中英语教材阅读语篇可读性研究: 以人教版和外研版为例[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 重庆: 四川外国语大学, 2025.
[5] 邢文骏. 基于Coh-Metrix的高中英语教材与高考阅读语篇难度比较研究[J]. 中小学英语教学与研究, 2025(2): 71-76.
[6] 肖金美. 新课改下中国高中英语教材的阅读文本复杂度研究[J]. 现代语言学, 2025, 13(6): 588-597.
[7] Tomlinson, B. (2012) Materials Development for Language Learning and Teaching. Language Teaching, 45, 143-179.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444811000528
[8] Flesch, R. (1948) A New Readability Yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, 221-233.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057532
[9] Bailin, A. and Grafstein, A. (2001) The Linguistic Assumptions Underlying Readability Formulae: A Critique. Language & Communication, 21, 285-301.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0271-5309(01)00005-2
[10] 江进林, 韩宝成. 基于Coh-Metrix的大学英语六级与托福、雅思阅读语篇难度研究[J]. 中国外语, 2018, 15(3): 86-95.
[11] 王艳伟. 专业英语教材与测试阅读文本易读度比较研究[J]. 外语研究, 2021, 38(2): 70-75.
[12] Krashen, S.D. (1985) The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. Longman.
[13] Carrell, P.L. and Eisterhold, J.C. (1983) Schema Theory and ESL Reading Pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 553-573.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3586613
[14] Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L. (2018) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 3rd Edition, Sage.