[請益] 幾個問題...

[Cadi ( )]

1. 作者簡介了1989年在美國出版的一本教養書籍，並且引述部分內容：
   "Personal space is expanding for the eight-year-old.
   Your child can now walk home by bus from a somewhat distant point.
   His walking area within his own neighborhood is so wide that
   it is sometimes hard to locate him."

   請問，這裡的 walk home by bus 應該是...... 印錯了嗎？？


2. 作者對另一本教養書籍的簡介：
   Using a droll tone --
   "most teenager disobedience lies in the realm of sleaze and deception"
   (rather than direct disobedience) --
   Dr. Wolf helps parents interpret teenager's unique style of communication
   and explains what to do once you understand their messages.

   droll的意思是 "amusing, but not in a way that you expect"
   可是我看不出來
   "most teenager disobedience lies in the realm of sleaze and deception"
   這句話裡面，
   哪裡有 "amusing, but not in a way that you expect" 這種意思呀？o_O

   有人可以指點一下嗎？


3. 父母太過保護孩子，反而會讓小孩學不到因應的能力：
   Real protection means teaching children to manage risks on their own,
   not shielding them from every hazard. Worrying excessively about
   discrimination (上文講到的例子是學校辦了性傾向工作坊，要求學童尊重不同
   性傾向的同學) while not letting your children walk around the block
   on their own can create highly conscious cripples. If pressed to stand up
   for what they have been taught to believe, I fear that most of the children
   we are raising wouldn't behave like Ruby Bridges (1960年，Ruby Bridges
   才六歲大就在紐奧良發起一場廢除種族隔離的活動). They wouldn't have the will
   to be courageous, and perhaps more important, they wouldn't have the
   support of their parents.

   請問，
   這裡的 highly conscious cripples
   是指 "有自知之明"的殘廢 之類的意思嗎？
   (因為這樣子教出來的孩子會自認為什麼都做不到？)


謝謝！！




--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) 
◆ From: 61.228.38.145
推 f127809718:第一個　應該是誇張一點的用法　指你的小孩現在可以藉
→ f127809718:由公車走回家　有點比喻　不知道你可不可以接受　這也
→ f127809718:算是一點幽默辣　之前人的觀念是小孩指能用走的到想要
→ f127809718:的地方 但是現在他們能搭公車了 超越之前的想法 用走來
→ f127809718:幽默的描述 更貼近以前人的想法
→ Cadi:似乎有道理呢，謝謝樓上~ :)