A-Level Chinese and Japanese: Proposed Rules Allow Reasonable Use of English | 中文与日文 A-Level 科目内容拟允许合理使用英语

📚 A-Level Chinese and Japanese: Proposed Rules Allow Reasonable Use of English | 中文与日文 A-Level 科目内容拟允许合理使用英语

Regulators and awarding organisations have been reviewing how A-level Chinese and A-level Japanese should be designed, taught and assessed in a market where most candidates are already fluent speakers. The headline proposal is simple: the subject content of these qualifications may include a reasonable amount of English, used purposefully rather than as a shortcut. In practice this means English could appear in rubric, stimulus material, translation tasks, literary and cultural commentary, and in the wording of assessment objectives, while the target language remains the central object of study.

监管机构与考试局近期在审视中文、日文 A-Level 的课程与考评设计，因为报考这两科的学生中，绝大多数已是流利的母语使用者。提案的核心表述十分简洁：这两个科目的学科内容可以合理使用英语，且须”有目的地使用”，而非作为取巧的捷径。落到实处的含义是：英语可能出现在试卷指令、语料素材、翻译任务、文学与文化评述，以及考核目标的措辞中，而目标语言本身仍是学习的核心对象。

1. What the Proposal Actually Says | 提案到底说了什么

The proposal does not replace Chinese or Japanese with English, and it does not create an English-medium version of the qualification. It states that within the subject content, a reasonable and clearly justified use of English is permitted. The key words are “reasonable” and “justified”: every English element must serve an assessable language or cultural purpose that cannot be served as well in the target language.

提案并不是用英语取代中文或日文，也不是要开设”全英文授课”的中文/日文 A-Level。它规定：在学科内容范围内，允许合理且理由充分的英语使用。关键词是”合理”与”理由充分”——每一处英语元素都必须服务于某个可考核的语言或文化目的，而且该目的无法同样好地由目标语言承担。

Two boundaries are usually written into such rules. First, English must not reduce the demand of the target-language tasks. Second, English must not be used to test subject knowledge that could be tested in the target language at the same level of cognitive demand.

这类规则通常包含两条边界。第一，英语不得降低目标语言任务的要求难度。第二，不得用英语考查那些在同等认知要求下本可以用目标语言考查的学科知识。

2. Why English Became the Flashpoint | 英语为何成为争议焦点

For decades, A-level Chinese and Japanese sat awkwardly between two identities: a modern foreign language for beginners, and a heritage language for students with family or community backgrounds. The same paper had to stretch from learners who could barely order a meal to candidates who read newspapers daily, and the result was compressed grade distributions at the top and frustrated teachers at both ends.

几十年来，中文与日文 A-Level 一直尴尬地悬在两种身份之间：对零起点学生而言它是现代外语，对家庭或社区有语言背景的学生而言它又是继承语。同一份试卷既要照顾到连点餐都困难的初学者，又要照顾到每天读报的考生，结果便是高分区间被严重压缩，两端老师都不满意。

English entered the debate because it is the only honest common denominator. If the qualification is to test analytical and cultural competence rather than raw fluency, some part of the task must be able to assume a shared metalanguage, and in an international qualification that metalanguage is English.

英语之所以被卷入争论，是因为它是唯一诚实的共同基础。如果这个资格要考查分析与文化理解能力，而非单纯的语言流利度，那么任务中就必须有一部分能够预设一种共通的”元语言”，而在国际性资格中，这种元语言就是英语。

3. Heritage and Non-Heritage Candidates | 母语背景与非母语背景考生

The proposal is closely tied to the long-standing problem of differentiation. When a single un-tiered paper is taken by both groups, the ceiling effect is severe: strong heritage candidates cluster at the top grades, and non-heritage candidates can be discouraged before they start. Allowing English in defined places can separate “can you handle hard content?” from “how many characters do you already know?”

该提案与长期存在的”区分度”难题密切相关。当同一份不分层的试卷同时面向两类考生时，天花板效应非常严重：语言背景强的考生挤在高分段，而非母语背景的考生往往在起点就受到打击。在指定环节允许使用英语，可以把”你能否处理高难度内容”与”你已经认识多少汉字”这两件事区分开来。

Critics answer that this risks turning the qualification into a culture-and-literature course delivered in English, which would disadvantage exactly the learners who need the language practice most. The rebuttal is that a clearly bounded English allowance, capped by weighting, is different from an English-language paper.

批评者的回应是：这可能把该科目变成一门用英语讲授的文化与文学课程，反而伤害了最需要语言训练的学习者。支持者的反驳是：受分值权重严格限制、边界明确的英语配额，与一整份英文试卷完全是两回事。

4. What “Reasonable Use” Could Look Like | “合理使用”可能意味着什么

In consultation documents of this kind, “reasonable use” is normally defined by example rather than by abstract principle. The following are the categories most often cited.

在这类咨询文件中，”合理使用”通常通过举例而非抽象原则来界定。以下是出现频率最高的几类情形。

Rubric and instructions: command words such as “analyse”, “evaluate” and “compare” may be given bilingually so that the cognitive demand is transparent.

指令与说明：如”分析””评价””比较”等指令词可采用双语呈现，使认知要求清晰可辨。
Stimulus material: a short English text may accompany a target-language text so that candidates compare two cultural perspectives.

语料素材：可在目标语言文本旁配一段简短英文材料，让考生比较两种文化视角。
Translation: translation both into and out of the target language is a natural home for controlled English.

翻译：中译外与外译中都是受控使用英语的天然场景。
Commentary on literature and film: technical terms such as “narrative voice” or “unreliable narrator” may be glossed in English.

文学与影视评述：如”叙述视角””不可靠叙述者”等术语可用英语注释。
Research and independent project work: the written report may allow an English abstract or bibliography.

研究性学习与独立课题：书面报告可允许附英文摘要或参考文献。

5. Effect on Assessment Objectives | 对考核目标的影响

Assessment objectives carry the weightings, and the English allowance only becomes real once it appears there. A typical structure for a revised specification keeps the four familiar strands and assigns proportions that leave the target language dominant.

考核目标承载着分值权重，只有当英语配额写进考核目标，它才算真正落地。修订后的大纲通常沿用四个熟悉的维度，并通过权重分配确保目标语言仍占主导。

总成绩 = 听力 × 25% + 阅读 × 25% + 写作 × 25% + 口语 × 25%

A workable rule of thumb is that English should never exceed roughly one tenth of the total marks in any single component, and should never be the sole route to a mark in a target-language objective.

一条可操作的准则是：在任一份试卷中，英语分值原则上不超过总分的大约十分之一，且绝不能让英语成为达成某个目标语言类考核目标的唯一得分途径。

The CEFR benchmarks below are commonly used to describe the intended progression, from the entry point of the course to its most demanding reading and writing tasks.

下表所列的 CEFR 基准常用于描述课程的预期进阶，从入学起点一直延伸到难度最高的读写任务。

Stage	Benchmark	Typical demand
Course entry	B1 – B2	Handles everyday topics, simple argument
AS level	B2	Summarises, compares, gives reasons
A level	B2+ – C1	Analyses literature, sustains argument

6. Board-by-Board Snapshot | 各考试局现状速览

Although the proposal is regulatory rather than commercial, its practical effect varies by board. Below is a schematic comparison of how the main international and UK specifications currently handle the language of the paper and where the English allowance could bite.

尽管提案属监管层面而非商业行为，其实际影响仍因考试局而异。下表概括了主要国际与英国本土大纲目前对试卷语言的处理方式，以及英语配额可能产生实际作用的位置。

Specification	Language of papers	English in tasks
Cambridge International A Level Chinese	Target language with English rubric	Translation and essay prompts
Cambridge International A Level Japanese	Target language with English rubric	Translation and essay prompts
Pearson Edexcel A Level Chinese	Target language, English instructions	Research project and translation
Revised subject content (proposed)	Target language dominant	Bounded, justified, weighted

Note the pattern: English already exists in these qualifications, but informally and unevenly. The proposal’s real contribution is to make that use explicit, capped and inspectable.

请注意其中的规律：英语其实早已存在于这些资格中，只是非正式且不均衡。提案真正的贡献，是让这种使用变得明确、有上限、可审查。

7. Marking, Grade Boundaries and Comparability | 评分、分数线与可比性

The technical risk sits in comparability. If English appears in one session’s paper and not the next, or in one board’s paper and not another, grade boundaries cease to be comparable across years and boards. Mark schemes must therefore state, in advance and in writing, exactly where English earns credit and where it does not.

技术风险集中在可比性上。若某次考试出现英语元素而下次没有，或某考试局出现而别家没有，那么分数线在年度之间与考试局之间的可比性便不复存在。因此评分标准必须提前且以书面方式明确：何处英语可以得分，何处不能。

Two safeguards are usually recommended. First, mark schemes should award content and analysis marks independently of the language used to express them. Second, translation tasks should specify a tolerance band, for example accepting a rendering that conveys 90% or more of the source meaning without distortion.

通常建议两项保障措施。第一，评分标准应让内容分与分析分独立于表达所使用的语言。第二，翻译任务应规定容错区间，例如接受在不变形的前提下传达原文意义 90% 以上的译文。

8. Implications for Schools and Departments | 对学校与教研组的影响

For departments, the immediate consequence is curricular rather than administrative. If English may legitimately appear in commentary and project work, then teachers need to teach academic metalanguage explicitly, in both languages, instead of assuming students will absorb it.

对教研组而言，直接后果是课程层面的，而非行政层面的。如果英语可以合规地出现在评述与课题写作中，教师就必须显性地、双语地教授学术元语言，而不能假定学生会自行吸收。

Scheme of work: map every point where English is permitted, and label it.

教学计划：逐一标出所有允许使用英语的节点，并加以标注。
Assessment policy: state how English is credited internally, so mock marking matches the real thing.

考评政策：明确校内评分中英语如何计分，使模考判分与真实考试一致。
Staffing: pair a language specialist with a literature or humanities specialist where needed.

师资配置：必要时让语言专长教师与文学或人文学科教师结对备课。
Student guidance: be explicit about which tasks reward English and which penalise it.

学生指导：明确说明哪些任务中英语可以加分，哪些任务中会失分。

9. How Candidates Should Prepare Now | 考生现在应如何准备

The safest preparation strategy is to assume the target language remains decisive. Candidates who can write strong analysis in Chinese or Japanese will be unaffected whether or not they use English; candidates who rely on English as a crutch will be exposed the moment the weighting is applied.

最稳妥的备考策略是假定目标语言仍是决定性的。能用中文或日文写出有力分析的考生，用不用英语都不受影响；而把英语当拐杖的考生，一旦权重落实就会立刻暴露短板。

Build a bilingual glossary of 150 to 200 analytical terms you can deploy in either language.

建立一份 150 至 200 条的双语分析术语表，做到两种语言都能自如调用。
Practise timed translation in both directions, and mark yourself against meaning coverage, not word-for-word equivalence.

练习双向限时翻译，并以意义覆盖度而非逐字对等来自我评分。
Write every essay first in the target language, then add a short English abstract to check your argument’s logic.

每篇作文先用目标语言写成，再补一段简短英文摘要，用以检验论证逻辑。

10. Risks, Criticisms and Open Questions | 风险、批评与未决问题

The strongest criticism is that a permissive English clause may be quietly widened over successive review cycles. Once English is legitimate in one component, awarding organisations face commercial pressure to extend it, because English-medium tasks are easier to write, mark and quality-assure.

最有力的批评是：一条宽松的英语条款，可能在后续多轮评审中被悄然放宽。一旦英语在某份试卷中取得合法地位，考试局就会面临将其扩展的商业压力，因为英语任务更易命制、评分与质量管控。

A second question is who decides reasonableness. If the judgement sits with the awarding organisation alone, the regulator’s oversight is retrospective; if it sits with the regulator, specifications risk becoming rigid and slow to update.

第二个问题是：由谁判定”合理性”。若判断权完全属于考试局，监管便只能是事后追责；若属于监管机构，大纲又可能变得僵化、更新缓慢。

A third and less discussed issue is washback. Whatever the rules say, students optimise for marks, and if English-marked tasks are perceived as easier, classroom time will drift towards them within a single academic year.

第三个较少被讨论的问题是反拨效应。无论规则如何规定，学生总向分数优化；如果带英语评分的任务被普遍认为更容易，课堂时间就会在一个学年内迅速向其倾斜。

11. Key Takeaways and Timeline | 核心要点与时间表

The proposal should be read as a clarification rather than a revolution. It acknowledges that English is already present in these qualifications and tries to bring it under control, with bounded scope, explicit weighting and transparent mark schemes.

应把该提案理解为一次澄清，而非一场革命。它承认英语已经存在于这些资格之中，并试图将其纳入管控，办法是限定范围、明确权重、公开评分标准。

For candidates sitting examinations in the next two to three years, current specifications and their existing conventions will almost certainly continue to apply. For those entering in later cohorts, the practical advice is unchanged: keep the target language at the centre, and treat English as a precision tool rather than a rescue rope.

对于未来两三年内参加考试的考生，现行大纲及其既有惯例几乎肯定继续适用。对于更晚入学的学生，实用建议依然不变：让目标语言始终居于中心，把英语当作精密工具，而不是救命绳索。

Published by TutorHao | A-Level Chinese & Japanese Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）

A-Level Chinese and Japanese: Proposed Rules Allow Reasonable Use of English | 中文与日文 A-Level 科目内容拟允许合理使用英语