《高中英语课程标准（2017版）》的发布在高中英语学科教学领域掀起了一股改革的浪潮，其中语言知识部分与老版英语课程标准有较大的区别。2017版课程标准所提出的语言知识包括语音、词汇、语法、语篇和语用知识，尽管老版课程标准中“功能”部分的语言知识已经展示出了国家对于语用知识的关注，语用知识这一板块内容的明确提出更是表明语用知识越来越受到英语教学理论与实践领域的重视，由此而引发的“如何培养学生们的语用能力”成为新时期英语教学不可忽视的一个重要命题。教材作为教师授课的主要参考依据具有其他资料无法替代的功能，而且对于较为落后的地区教材很可能是学生们唯一的外语学习资料。因此，教材需要严格筛选语用知识，为学生提供丰富且地道的语用信息，从而在课程标准的指引下逐步培养学生的语用能力。

那么，目前学生所使用的教材中包含哪些类型的语用知识？各种类型的语用知识在教材中分别占有多大的比例？这些语用知识以何种方式呈现在教材中？教材内容是否符合新课程标准的要求？对这些问题的回答能够帮助研究者和教学实践者明晰语用知识在现用教材中的价值，并进一步调整教师教学与学生学习。

为了进一步回答这些问题，本研究选取了北京地区选用的两套英语教材作为研究对象，它们分别是人教版高中英语教材与北师大版高中英语教材，并采用内容分析法对教材中所含语用知识进行分析。研究发现：（1）两套教材都包含丰富多样的语用知识，其中人教版高中英语教材所包含的语用知识类型更丰富；（2）教材中的语用知识呈现方式比较相似，两套教材包含解释、举例、练习三种知识的呈现方式，举例加上练习这种知识呈现方式最为常见。另外，北师大版高中英语教材更偏向使用元语用知识；（3）教材中语用知识的呈现频率都相对较低，其中言语行为知识所占比例最大；（4）两套教材中的语用知识内容并不完全符合新课程标准的要求，缺少全面的有关言语行为、语言的得体性以及与礼貌相关的知识呈现。

基于以上研究发现，本研究为英语教材编写者与一线教师提供相关建议，以期在之后的教材编写与英语教学中能够不断调试，逐步提升学生的语用能力。

The release of The English Curriculum Standard for Senior High Schools has set off a wave of reform in the field of English teaching in senior high schools, and the content of language knowledge is quite different from the old version.

The content of language knowledge proposed in the 2017 edition of The English Curriculum Standard for Senior High Schools includes phonetics, vocabulary, grammar, discourse, and pragmatic knowledge. Although the language knowledge in the “functional” part of the old version of the curriculum standards has shown the attention paid to pragmatic knowledge, the explicit proposal of the term pragmatic knowledge shows that it has been paid more and more attention in the field of English teaching. Thus, “How to cultivate students’ pragmatic competence” has become an important proposition that cannot be ignored in English teaching in the new era. Textbooks, as the main reference for teachers, cannot be replaced by other materials, especially for the relatively backward areas where textbooks may be the only foreign language learning materials for students. Therefore, textbooks need to strictly screen pragmatic knowledge to provide students with rich and authentic pragmatic information, so as to gradually cultivate students’ pragmatic competence under the guidance of English curriculum standards.

So, what types of pragmatic knowledge are contained in the textbooks currently used by students? How much proportion do various types of pragmatic knowledge present in textbooks? In what way is pragmatic knowledge presented in textbooks? Do the textbooks meet the requirements of the new curriculum standards? The answers to these questions can help researchers and teaching practitioners clarify the value of pragmatic knowledge in current textbooks and further adjust teachers’ teaching and students’ learning.

In order to further answer these questions, this study selects two sets of English textbooks used in Beijing as the research object, which are respectively the Senior English for China textbooks published by People’s Education Press and the High School English textbooks published by Beijing Normal University Press. Then, this study uses the content analysis method to analyze the pragmatic knowledge contained in the textbooks.

The results show that: (1) both textbooks contain diverse pragmatic knowledge, among which Senior English for China textbooks contain richer types of pragmatic knowledge; (2) The presentation ways of pragmatic knowledge in the two sets of textbooks are similar. They contain three ways of presentation, namely, explaining, giving examples, and practicing. The combination of giving examples and doing exercises is the most frequently used presentation manner. In addition, High School English textbooks contain more meta-pragmatic knowledge; (3) The presentation frequency of pragmatic knowledge in textbooks is relatively low, and the proportion of speech act information is the highest one; (4) The content of pragmatic knowledge in the two textbooks does not fully meet the requirements of the new curriculum standard, and there is no comprehensive presentation of knowledge related to speech acts, language appropriateness, and politeness.

Based on the above research findings, this study provides relevant suggestions for English textbook compilers and English teachers, with a view to continuous improvements in subsequent textbook compilation and English teaching. Therefore, it is hoped that students’ pragmatic competence can be gradually improved.