<p><meta charset="utf-8" /><u>R&eacute;sum&eacute; :</u> Dans cet article, nous partons de la constatation que les exercices les plus anciens ne comportaient aucune consigne, mais tout au plus un intitul&eacute; indiquant le type d&rsquo;exercice (traduction, version) ou le probl&egrave;me grammatical trait&eacute; (adverbes, articles) pour d&eacute;crire l&rsquo;&eacute;volution de la consigne en fonction des m&eacute;thodes en vogue, de la grammaire-traduction &agrave; la perspective actionnelle. L&rsquo;&eacute;pilogue de ce texte refl&egrave;te notre deuxi&egrave;me communication lors des journ&eacute;es d&rsquo;&eacute;tudes sur la consigne, pendant laquelle nous avons relev&eacute; que la plupart des auteurs ne consacrent aucune attention &agrave; la formulation des consignes.</p> <p><em><u>Abstract:</u> In this article, we start from the observation that the oldest exercises did not include any instruction, but at most a title indicating the type of exercise (translation, version) or the grammatical problem treated (adverbs, articles) in order to describe the evolution of the instructions according to the methods in vogue, from the grammar-translation to the activity theory. The epilogue of this text reflects our second communication during the study days on instructions, during which we observed that most authors devote no attention to the formulation of instructions.</em></p>