自上世纪九十年代起，中介语语用学领域涌现出一批针对英语教材中言语行为教学状况的研究。研究发现，大多数英语教材在言语行为教学方面存在以下三点问题：外显教学内容缺失，教学材料缺乏真实性，教学内容脱离语境。而在中国开展的此类研究数量较少，尤其缺乏针对高中英语教材展开的全面、系统的研究。本研究以五个中国大陆地区普通高级中学广泛使用的英语教材版本（北师大版，外研社版，人教版，牛津上海版，意林版）为研究对象，分析了上述教材中的言语行为外显教学内容。数据显示，与前人研究中分析过的针对同等英语水平学习者的英语教材相比，上述高中英语教材所展现的言语行为种类较少，教学次数较多，但以上差异经检验均不显著;五个系列的教材之间在言语行为种类及教学次数方面表现相似。质性分析结果显示，五个教材系列提供的言语行为例子普遍脱离实际应用情况：言语行为用语通常非真实语境中的高频表达方式，且从语篇层面上来看，不能展现完整的言语行为过程。五个版本的教材普遍忽视了语境在言语行为教学中的作用，但又不同程度地关注到言语行为表达方式的正式、礼貌、直接程度和根据社会环境变化的程度。质性分析中五个教材版本各有所长，各有所短，难以得出孰优孰劣的结论。本次研究针对如何提高高中英语教材言语行为教学材料的质量以及如何在教学中提高学生的言语行为语用能力对教师、教材编写者及研究者提出了建议。

Since the 1990s, there has been a considerable amount of research on the teaching of speech acts in English language teaching (ELT) textbooks. Previous studies conducted in other countries have shown that lack of explicit instruction, lack of authenticity, and decontextualization are three major issues existing in most ELT textbooks when it comes to the mentions of speech acts in textbooks. Similar research has hardly been conducted in China. Extensive and systematic studies on English as a foreign language (EFL) textbooks for high school students are especially in need. On this account, this research analyzed the explicit instruction on speech acts in five mainstream Chinese EFL textbook series (Beijing Normal University, New Standard, People’s Education Press, Oxford Shanghai, and Yilin) used by public high schools all over the country. Data showed that the textbooks presented fewer types of but a larger amount of speech acts than their equivalents examined in previous studies, though the differences were not significant. It was also found out that the five series were more similar than they were different in the variety and quantity of speech act realization. Qualitative data showed that the textbooks contained inauthentic speech act examples, especially for face-threatening acts: they provided expressions that were not frequently used in real-life scenarios and the language models were mostly incomplete on the discourse level. The five series similarly undervalued context in speech act instruction, but meanwhile, they demonstrated varying degrees of attention to formality, politeness, directness, and social variability of speech act expressions. With all the strengths and weaknesses of each series, it was ungrounded to claim one of them is manifestly superior to the others. Based on the results, recommendations for English teachers, textbook writers, and researchers were given for the improvement of ELT materials and learners’ speech act competence.