Preview

Linguistics & education

Advanced search

Structural and linguistic features of educational task formulation

https://doi.org/10.17021/2712-9519-2025-4-31-38

Abstract

This article aims at examination of task formulations in English-language textbooks as a stable type of educational text and offers a linguistic description of them at the Elementary and Intermediate levels according to CEFR. Using the English File 4th edition (Oxford) series of textbooks, a specialized corpus of task formulations was built. Next, it underwent manual linguistic markup to identify morphosyntactic, lexical semantic and formal features. Each formulation was segmented into two functional zones: a "basic" one, which specifies a directive action, and a "special" one, which parameterizes task completion through references to the source, criteria, and response format. A comparative analysis revealed a relationship between the gradation of the difficulty level of the language and the task formulation: at the Elementary level, short linear formulations with imperatives and minimal parameterization predominate; At Intermediate, syntactic and lexical variability increases, modality is activated, instructions become multi-step and rely on "analytical" operators (compare, analyze, suggest). Thus, the study yielded an operationalized model of task formulations as a type of directive microtext and an inventory of features suitable for linguistic and pedagogical purposes. The results of the study can be used to automate the linguistic tagging of texts, automated validation of compliance with CEFR levels, and the design of effective task formulations with controlled difficulty.

About the Authors

E. P. Bogatikova
Perm State National Research University
Россия

Bogatikova Evgeniia Pavlovna - candidate of philology, associate professor of the Department of linguodidactics



D. D. Berdnikov
Perm State National Research University
Россия

Berdnikov Daniil Dmitrievich - Master's degree in Digital Linguodidactics



Iu. V. Subbotina
Perm State National Research University
Россия

Subbotina Iulia Valeryevna - Master's degree in Digital Linguodidactics



References

1. Harmer J. How to teach English: An introduction to the practice of English language teaching. Harlow, England: Longman. 1998. – Pp. 4-17.

2. Scrivener, J. Learning teaching. Macmillan. 2005. – Pp. 90-95.

3. Tharp R. G., Gallimore R. Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. Cambridge University Press. 1988.

4. Nation P., Newton J.M. Teaching ESL/EFL Listening and Speaking. Routledge, New York and London, 2009. 205 pp.

5. Dornyei Z. (2001). Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667343

6. Korenev A.A. Kommunikativnye vidy deyatel'nosti kak chast' professional'no kommunikativnoj kompetencii yazykovogo pedagoga [Communicative activities as part of the professional communicative competence of a language teacher] // Vestn. Mosk. un-ta. Ser. 19. Lingvistika i mezhkul'turnaya kommunikaciya. 2022. – № 2. – Pp. 152-163.

7. Korenev A.A. Professional'no-kommunikativnye strategii kak komponent soderzhaniya yazykovogo obrazovaniya pri podgotovke budushchih uchitelej i prepodavatelej inostrannogo yazyka [Professional communication strategies as a component of the content of language education in the training of future teachers and lecturers of foreign languages] / A.A.Korenev // Rhema. Rema. – 2023. – № 3. – Pp. 97-121. – DOI 10.31862/2500-2953-2023-3-97-121.

8. CEFR. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Framework competency statements. 2018. – Pp. 3-11.

9. Borko H., Livingston C. Cognition Improvisation: Differences in Mathematics Instruction by Expert and Novice Teachers. American Education Research Journal, 26, 1989. – Pp 473-498.

10. Watkins P., Thornbury S., Millin S. “Course materials”. In the CELTA Course, The Celta Course / Cambridge // Cambridge University Press. – 2023. – 227 p.

11. Makarycheva M.D., Korenev A.A. Formulirovanie zadanij kak professional'no kommunikativnoe umenie budushchih prepodavatelej [Formulating assignments as a professional and communicative skill of future teachers] / Vestn. Mosk. un-ta. Ser. 19. Lingvistika i mezhkul'turnaya kommunikaciya. 2017. – № 4. – Pp. 138-147.

12. Klimanova O.A. Funkcional'naya specifika uchebnyh mikrotekstov: kognitivnyj aspect [Functional specificity of educational microtexts: cognitive aspect] // Kognitivnye aspekty izucheniya yazykovyh yavlenij v germanskih yazykah: Mezhdunar. nauch. sb. Samara, 2000. – Pp. 113-120.

13. Klimanova O.A. Autentichnyj uchebnyj diskurs v kontekste sovremennyh lingvisticheskih issledovanij: na materiale mikrotekstov formulirovok uchebnyh zadanij [Authentic educational discourse in the context of modern linguistic research: based on microtexts of educational assignment formulations]: Avtoref. diss. ... kand. filol. nauk. Samara, 2001.

14. Kemma El. Giving Effective Instructions in EFL Classrooms. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research. January 31, 2019. – Pp. 74-92.


Review

For citations:


Bogatikova E.P., Berdnikov D.D., Subbotina I.V. Structural and linguistic features of educational task formulation. Linguistics & education. 2025;5(4):31-38. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17021/2712-9519-2025-4-31-38

Views: 18

JATS XML


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2712-9519 (Online)