本文選題：初中語文教材 + 人教版　； 參考：《上海師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文選取大陸人教版與臺(tái)灣翰林版初中語文教材中文言文的重合篇目進(jìn)行比較分析。在正文第一章中分析了兩地語文教材編寫的影響因素,包括內(nèi)部因素,如出版社人員主體地位差異、教材編寫團(tuán)隊(duì)組成模式以及研究發(fā)展機(jī)制的完善程度等;外部因素,如政策環(huán)境的變動(dòng)、審查制度下教材內(nèi)容的趨同性及使用者需求產(chǎn)生作用力的強(qiáng)弱不同等。第二章中比較了兩版文言文教材的編寫依據(jù),即大陸《義務(wù)教育語文課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)》(2011年版)和臺(tái)灣《國民中小學(xué)九年一貫課程綱要》(民國九十七年版)。從課程目標(biāo)和編寫要求兩方面進(jìn)行比較分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)兩版教材都重視學(xué)生聽、說、讀、寫等基本能力的培養(yǎng),對(duì)于文言文的教學(xué)目標(biāo),都注重符合學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)心理,各個(gè)階段注意前后銜接,循序漸進(jìn)。翰林版對(duì)于初中各個(gè)年級(jí)段文言選文的比例做出明確要求,讓編選者心中有數(shù);而人教版只有在附錄1《優(yōu)秀詩文背誦推薦篇目》中有所要求,對(duì)各年級(jí)的文言文比例未作明確要求,這雖然給了編選者一定的選擇空間,可也為編寫帶來更多的主觀性。對(duì)于文言選文的編寫,翰林版教材更加注重學(xué)生的自我學(xué)習(xí)能力培養(yǎng),通過給學(xué)生提供較多的學(xué)習(xí)資源,降低自學(xué)的難度,促使教材向?qū)W材的轉(zhuǎn)變。第三章對(duì)兩版教材的編排體系進(jìn)行比較。初中人教版在文言文選文的編排上呈現(xiàn)出化散為整、逐級(jí)增加、由淺入深的特點(diǎn);翰林版在文言文選文的編排上呈現(xiàn)出靈活分散、均衡分布的特點(diǎn)。兩版教材文言文的編排在教學(xué)各有千秋,利弊并存,形成一定的互補(bǔ)性。第四章是兩版教材重合篇目的比較概括分析,就選文篇名來說,翰林版在使用上更加嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)、準(zhǔn)確,遵循原文,注重歷史的傳承性;選文具體內(nèi)容的不同主要集中在標(biāo)點(diǎn)與段落的差異上,字詞的選用與內(nèi)容增刪的差異不大。對(duì)于能夠突出表現(xiàn)情感的這類標(biāo)點(diǎn)符號(hào),翰林版的使用要更加合理,以《鄒忌諷齊王納諫》為例進(jìn)行仔細(xì)分析。第五章就兩版教材助讀系統(tǒng)而言,翰林版比人教版單篇課文的內(nèi)容安排要豐富許多,將知識(shí)設(shè)置劃分地更為細(xì)致。此外,本文對(duì)助讀系統(tǒng)的細(xì)究主要集中在注釋上,研究發(fā)現(xiàn)由于所選版本出處、參考譯本注本以及編者考量的差異,在文言注釋的準(zhǔn)確性上兩者都存在一定問題。雖然兩版教材存在諸多差異,但是其在文化傳承方面有著相同的地方,通過一定的表達(dá)方式與表達(dá)內(nèi)容來達(dá)到提升學(xué)生的人文素養(yǎng),這在本文中的最后一章有所闡述。
[Abstract]:This article selects the mainland people Education edition and the Taiwan Hanlin edition junior middle school Chinese language textbook superposition article to carry on the comparative analysis. In the first chapter of the text, the author analyzes the influencing factors, including the internal factors, such as the difference of the main body position of the publishers, the composition model of the textbook writing team and the perfection of the research and development mechanism, and so on; the external factors, etc. For example, the change of policy environment, the convergence of teaching material content under the review system and the strength of the user's demand are different. The second chapter compares the compiling basis of the two editions of classical Chinese textbooks, namely, the Chinese Curriculum Standard for compulsory Education in mainland China (2011 edition) and the Nine year consistent Curriculum outline for National Primary and Middle Schools in Taiwan (97 edition). Through comparative analysis of curriculum objectives and writing requirements, it is found that both editions attach importance to the cultivation of students' basic abilities, such as listening, speaking, reading and writing, and pay attention to the teaching objectives of classical Chinese, which are in line with the students' learning psychology. Pay attention to the connection of each stage, step by step. The Hanlin version makes a clear request for the proportion of selected articles in classical Chinese in each grade of junior high school, so that the editors can have a clear idea; while the version of the Education of people is only required in Appendix 1, "recommendation of excellent Poetry and essay recitation". The proportion of classical Chinese in each grade is not clearly required, which gives the selector a certain space of choice, but also brings more subjectivity to the writing. For the compilation of classical Chinese, Hanlin version of the textbook pays more attention to the cultivation of students' self-learning ability, by providing students with more learning resources, reducing the difficulty of self-study, and promoting the transformation of teaching materials to learning materials. Chapter three compares the arrangement system of the two editions. The junior middle school people education edition in the classical Chinese selected text arrangement appears to be scattered into the whole, step by step increase, from shallow to deep features; Hanlin version in the classical Chinese selection of the layout of the text presented a flexible dispersion, balanced distribution of the characteristics. The arrangement of classical Chinese in the two editions of teaching has its own advantages and disadvantages, which is complementary to each other. The fourth chapter is a comparative analysis of the overlap of the two editions of teaching materials. As far as the title of selected articles is concerned, the Hanlin version is more rigorous, accurate, following the original text and paying attention to the inheritance of history. The specific content of the selected text is mainly focused on the difference between punctuation and paragraph, and the difference between the choice of words and the addition and deletion of the content is not significant. For this kind of punctuation mark, the use of Hanlin version should be more reasonable, taking Zou Ji satirizing the king of Qi Na Jian as an example to make a careful analysis. In the fifth chapter, as far as the reading aid system of the two editions is concerned, Hanlin version is much richer than the single text arrangement of the human education edition, and the knowledge setting is divided more carefully. In addition, the study focuses on the annotation. It is found that there are some problems in the accuracy of classical Chinese annotation due to the differences of the source of the selected version, the reference version and the editor's consideration. Although there are many differences between the two textbooks, they have the same place in the cultural inheritance, through a certain way of expression and expression content to improve the humanistic literacy of students, which is elaborated in the last chapter of this paper.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：G633.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 熊壯;;關(guān)于中學(xué)語文教材文言文注釋應(yīng)注意的幾個(gè)問題分析[J];中華少年;2016年17期

2 和艷芳;;《陋室銘》三疑新解[J];現(xiàn)代語文(教學(xué)研究版);2015年06期

3 林秋雁;徐學(xué);;從語文教材看兩岸語文教育之異同——比較大陸人教版與臺(tái)灣翰林版初中語文教材[J];福建基礎(chǔ)教育研究;2015年01期

4 聶志軍;彭姿;黃頌梅;;論中學(xué)語文教材文言文編寫的查新問題——以《愛蓮說》的注釋為例[J];當(dāng)代教育理論與實(shí)踐;2015年01期

5 陳菁霞;;國學(xué)教育應(yīng)回到經(jīng)典本身——臺(tái)灣中學(xué)語文教材的經(jīng)驗(yàn)與反思[J];教師博覽;2014年12期

6 蘇祖祥;;植根于歷史和本土之中的文學(xué)之花——臺(tái)灣《國文》掠影[J];名作欣賞;2014年31期

7 鄭學(xué)鋒;;人教版初中語文文言文注釋疑誤舉例[J];課程教育研究;2014年15期

8 王琦;;大陸、臺(tái)灣地區(qū)高中語文教材文言文編選情況的比較研究——以人教版和翰林版為例[J];教育教學(xué)論壇;2014年11期

9 李黨輝;魏本亞;;《陋室銘》教學(xué)內(nèi)容審視與反思[J];語文教學(xué)通訊;2014年05期

10 王金娥;;“通”與“同”:人教版初中語文文言文注釋問題略說[J];內(nèi)蒙古師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(教育科學(xué)版);2013年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 謝蓮;人教版初中語文教科書插圖研究及教學(xué)運(yùn)用[D];貴州師范大學(xué);2015年

2 黃利群;人教版初中語文教材文言文被釋詞詞匯研究[D];海南師范大學(xué);2015年

3 楊?yuàn)檴?初中文言文歧義注釋研究[D];四川師范大學(xué);2014年

4 王超;大陸與臺(tái)灣高中語文教材（必修）助讀系統(tǒng)比較研究[D];陜西師范大學(xué);2014年

5 主艷鳳;插圖在初中語文閱讀教學(xué)中的運(yùn)用研究[D];山東師范大學(xué);2013年

6 俞向軍;大陸與臺(tái)灣初中語文教材結(jié)構(gòu)比較研究[D];西南大學(xué);2013年

7 廖中麗;人教版初中語文教材“課后練習(xí)”設(shè)計(jì)評(píng)析[D];重慶師范大學(xué);2010年

8 李毅;中學(xué)語文課本古文注釋研究[D];重慶師范大學(xué);2010年

9 周蕾;大陸、臺(tái)灣初中文言文教材編制比較研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2009年

10 許秀如;大陸臺(tái)灣兩地初中語文教材比較研究[D];福建師范大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：1841351