A Study of Reading Text Complexity in Chinese Senior High School English Textbooks under the New Curriculum Reform

随着我国新课改的实施与深化，对教材的分层分类设计提出更高要求，教材的编排与研究也受到广泛关注。研究从词汇、句法、和语篇维度综合探讨中国内地和中国香港高中英语各教材内部不同系列之间的阅读文本复杂度差异，发现：1) 新人教与新外研版的必修系列的阅读文本复杂度等级均为四级(高考)，选择性必修系列均为五级(CET-4)，必修系列可读性程度均为较容易，选择性必修为标准；牛津版的基础与高阶系列的复杂度均为五级，可读性均为标准程度，雅集版的基础系列等级为五级，高阶为六级(CET-6)，基础的可读性程度为标准，高阶为较困难。2) 新人教版的不同系列在词汇复杂度的VS2和CTTR，句法复杂度的MLT和VP/T，和语篇衔接的连词方面，都存在较大程度显著差异；新外研版的不同系列在词汇复杂度的LS1和CTTR，句法复杂度的MLS、MLT、MLC、CP/C、CP/T、CN/C和CN/T，和语篇衔接的所有句子实词重叠的平均数方面，均有较大程度显著差异。3) 牛津版的不同系列在词汇复杂度的VS2和在语篇衔接的连词方面存在一定的数值差异，句法复杂度各指标数值非常接近；雅集版的不同系列词汇复杂度、句法复杂度、和语篇衔接上没有显著差异。通过剖析教材复杂度特征，为教学和教材改革提供参考和启示。With the implementation and deepening of China’s new curriculum reform, higher requirements have been put forward for the design of textbooks in terms of stratification and categorization. Also, the arrangement and study of textbooks have received extensive attention. This study comprehensively examines the differences in complexity of reading texts between different series of senior high school English textbooks in Mainland of China and Hong Kong, China, in terms of lexical, syntactic, and discourse dimensions. The results show that: 1) the complexity levels of reading texts in the compulsory series of the new People’s Education Press edition (PEP) and new Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press edition (FLTRP) are both at level 4 (National College Entrance Examination), their selective compulsory series are at level 5 (CET-4). The readability level of the compulsory series are all relatively easy, and selective compulsory series are standard. The complexity of basic and advanced series of the Oxford edition are both at level 5, and their readability degrees are at standard level. The level of the basic series of Aristo Educational Press edition (AEP) is at level 5, and that of the advanced series is at level 6 (CET-6). The readability of its basic series is standard, and that of the advanced series is at a relatively difficult level. 2) There are large degrees of significant differences between the different series of the new PEP edition with regard to the VS2 and the CTTR in lexical complexity, the MLT and the VP/T in syntactic complexity, and the connectives in discourse cohesion. The different series of new FLTRP edition show significant differences to a greater extent in LS1 and CTTR for lexical complexity, MLS, MLT, MLC, CP/C, CP/T, CN/C, and CN/T for syntactic complexity, and the mean number of overlapping real words in all sentences for cohesion. 3) The different series of the Oxford edition show some numerical differences in VS2 for lexical complexity and connectives for cohesion, and the values of the measures of syntactic complexity are very close to each other. There are no significant differences in lexical complexity, syntactic complexity and discourse cohesion in the different series of the AEP edition. Dissecting the complexity characteristics of textbooks provides data references and insights for teaching and reform.