大学英语六级巅峰阅读训练

　　Smother Love

　　Every morning,Leanne Brickland and he sister would bicycle to school with the same wordsringing in their ears:“watch out crossing the road.Don't speak to strangers”.“Mum would standat the top of the steps and call that out,”says Brickland,now a primary-school teachet andmother of four from Rotorua,New Zealand.Substitute boxers and thongs for undies(内衣),andthe nagging fears that haunt parents haven't really changed.What has altered,dramatically,isthe confidence we once had in our children's ability to fling themselves at life without a grown-up holding their hands

　　Worry-ridden Parents and Stifled Kids

　　By today'sstandards,the childhood freedoms Brickland took for granted practically verge onparental neglect.Her mother worked,so she and her sister had a key to let themselves in afterschool and were expected todo their homework and put on the potatoes for dinner.At thefamily's beach house near Wellington,the two girls,from the age of five or six,would disappearfor hours to play in the lakes and sands.

　　A generation later,Brickland's children are growing up in a world more indulged yet moreaccustomed to peril.The techno-minded generation of PlayStation kids who can conquer entirearmies and rocket through spacecan't even be trusted to cross the street alone.“I worry aboutthe road.I worry about strangers.In some ways I think they're missing out,but I like to be ableto see them, to know where they are and what they'redoing.”

　　Call it smother love,indulged-kid syndrome,parental neurosis(神经症).Even though today'schildren have the universe at their fingertips thanks to the Internet,their physical boundariesare shrinking at a rapid pace.According to British social scientist Mayer Hillman,a child's playzone has contracted so radically that we're producing the human equivalent of henhousechickens-plump from lack of exercise and without the flexibility and initiative of freerange kidsof the past.The spirit of our times is no longer the resourceful adventurer Tom Sawyer butrather the worry-ridden dad and his stifled only child in Finding Nemo.

　　In short,child rearing has become an exercise in risk minimization,represented by stories suchas the father who refused to allow his daughter on a school picnic to the beach for fear shemight drown.While it's natural for a parent to want to protect their children from danger,youhave to wonder;Have we gone too far?

　　Parents Wrap Kids up in Cotton Wool

　　A study conducted by Paul Tranter,a lecturer in geography at the Australian Defence ForceAcademy in Canberra,showed that while Australian and New Zealand children had similarsmounts of unsupervised freedom,it was far less than German of English kids.For example,onlya third of ten-year-olds in Australia and New Zealand were allowed to visit places other thanschool alone,compared to 80 percent in Germany.

　　Girls were even more restricted than boys,with parents fearing assault or molestation(骚扰),while traffic dangers were seen as the greatest threat to boys.Bike ownership has doubledin a generation,but“independent mobility”---the ability to roam and explore unsupervised---has radically declined.In Auckland,for example,many primary schools have done away withbicycle racks because the streets are considered too unsafe.And in Christchurch,New Zealand'smost bike-friendly city,the number of pupils cycling to school has fallenfrom more than 90percent in the late 1970s to less than 20 percent.Safely strapped into the family 4x4,childrenare instead driven from home to the school gate,then off to ballet,soccer or swimming lessons--rarely straying from watchful adult eyes.

　　In the U.S.Journal of Physical Education,Recreation&Dance,New Jersey assistant principaland hockey coach Bobbie Schultz writes that playing in the street after school withneighbourhood kids--creating their own rules,making their own decisions and settling disputes--was where the real learning took place.“The street was one of the greatest sources of my lifeskills,”she says.“I don't see‘on-the-street play’anymore.I see adult-organized activities.Parentsdon't realize what an integral part of character development their children are missing.”

　　Armoured with bicycle helmets,car seats,“safe”playgrounds and sunscreen,children are gettingthe messageloud and clear that the world is full or peril--and that they're ill-equipped to handleit alone.Yet research consistently shows young people are much more capable than wethink,says professor Anne Smith,directorof New Zealand's Children's Issues Centre.“The thingthat many adults have difficulty with is that children can't learn to be grown-up if they'reexcluded and protected all the time.”

　　Educational psychologist Paul Prangley reckons it's about time the kid gloves came off.Hebelieves parenting has taken on a paranoid(患妄想狂的)edge that's creating a generation ofnaive,insecure youngsters whoare subconsciously being taught they're incapable of handingthings by themselves.“Flexibility and the ability to resist pressure and temptation are learnedskills,”Prangley explains.“If you wrap kids up in cotton wool and don't give them theopportunity to take risks,they're less equipped to make responsible decisions later in life.”

　　Parents Should Gain Proper Perspective

　　Sadly,high-profile cases of children being kidnapped and murdered--such as ten-year-old HollyWells and Jessica Chapman in the United Kingdom;five-year-old Chloe Hoson in Australia,whosebody was found just 200 metres from where she lived;and six-year-old Teresa Cormack in NewZealand,who was snatched off the street on her way to school--only serve to reinforceparents'fears.Teresa Cormack's death,for example,was one of the rare New Zealand cases ofrandom child kidnap.In Australia,the odds of someone under the age of 15 being murdered bya stranger have been estimated at one in four million.A child is at far greater risk from afamilymember or someone they know.

　　However,parental fear is contagious.In one British study,far more children feared an attack bya stranger than being hit by a car.“We are losing our sense of perspective,”write Jan Parkerand Jan Stimpson in their parenting book,Raising Happy Children.“Every parent has to negotiatetheir own route between equipping children with the skills they need to stay safe and notrestricting or terrifying them unnecessarily in the process.”

　　Dr.Claire Freeman,a planning expert at the University of Otago,points to the erosion ofcommunity responsibility as another casualty of that mutual distrust.Not so long ago,adultsknew all the local kids and werethe informal guardians of the neighbourhood.“Now,particularly ifyou are a man,you may hesitate to offer help to a lost child for fear your motives might bequestioned.”

　　More Space and More Attention to Kid's Needs

　　As a planner in the mid-1990s,Freeman became concerned about the loss of green space todevelopment and the erosion of informal places to play.In a study that looked at how childrenin the British city of Leeds spent their summer holidays,compared with their parents' childhoodexperiences,she found the freedom to explore had been severely contracted--in somecases,down to the front yard.Freeman says she cannot remember being inside the house as achild,or being alone.Growing up was about being part of a group.Now a mother offour,Freemanbelieves the “domestication of play”is robbing kids of their sense of belonging within a society.

　　Nevertheless,Freeman says children's needs are starting to get more emphasis.In theNetherlands,child-friendly “home zones”have been created where priority is given topedestrians,rather than cars.And ponds arebeing incorporated back into housing estates on theprinciple that children should learn to be safe aroundwater,rather than be surrounded by abarren landscape.After all ,as one of the smarter fosh says in Finding Nemo there's oneproblem with nothing ever will.

　　令人窒息的爱

　　每天早上，利安娜·布里克兰德和她妹妹骑自行车去上学时耳边总会回荡着：“过马路当心!别跟陌生人说话!”这样的话。“妈妈总是站在台阶顶上，叮嘱着”，布里克兰德说。她如今是一名小学老师，已是四个孩子的母亲，住在新西兰的罗托鲁阿。时过境迁，但物事依然：父母对孩子换内衣裤之类生活细节的唠唠叨叨、对孩子安全的担心受怕、老不放心的心态并未改变。[1]发生巨大变化的，是我们对孩子曾经有过的信心：相信他们没有大人的扶持，也能经受得住生活中的摸爬滚打。

　　父母过分担心，孩子受压制

　　按照今天的标准，布里克兰德认为儿童理所当然应该享有的童年自由实际上被父母忽视了。[2]她小的时候，母亲要上班，便给了她和妹妹各一把钥匙，放学后她们就自己进家门，自己做家庭作业，然后拿土豆当晚餐。她们家的房子靠近海滩，在惠灵顿附近;两个小女孩从五六岁开始，就常从家里跑出来，到礁湖和沙丘里去玩上几个小时。

　　到了下一代，布里克兰德的孩子们已是成长在一个生活越来越来越放纵但危险也越来越多的世界。如今一代的孩子都在游戏站长大，脑子里装满了各种各样的技术，他们可在游戏机上横扫整支军队，或乘火箭登上太空，但单独过街却无法让人放心。“好多年我都是步行或骑车上学，但我的孩子们没有，”布里克兰德说。“我很担心路上的情况，担心陌生人。在某些方面我觉得他们正在错过一些东西，但我还是想能看见他们，知道他们在哪儿、在做什么，这样我才会放心一些。”

　　这叫令人窒息的爱、溺爱子女综合症、父母神经质。如今的孩子，尽管多亏了因特网，大千世界的知识都能够唾手可得，但他们亲身经历的世界却在迅速萎缩。[3]根据英国社会科学家迈尔·希尔曼的说法：孩子的玩耍空间急剧收缩，人类自己也变得如同养鸡场的小鸡一般-----缺乏锻炼，容易发胖，缺乏以前自由自在的孩子们所有的适应能力和进取心。我们这个时代的精神，不再是汤姆·索亚那种足智多谋的冒险家，而是《海底总动员》中老是担心受怕的爸爸和他那被压制的独生子。

　　简而言之，抚养孩子已经成为了一种风险最小化的操练，很多事情都说明了这一点，比如一位父亲不准女儿参加学校的海滩野餐活动，因为担心女儿可能会溺水。作为家长，想要保护孩子远离危险是很自然的事情，但是你不禁要问：我们是不是管得太多了?

　　父母把孩子裹在棉絮中

　　位于堪培拉的澳大利亚国防军学院地理讲师保罗·特拉特的一项研究表明：澳大利亚和新西兰的孩子无人监督的自由活动量相近，但比起德国或英国的孩子要少得多。[4]譬如说，澳大利亚和新西兰仅有1/3的10岁儿童被允许单独去学校以外的地方玩，而在德国这一比率达到了80%。

　　与男孩相比，女孩受到的限制更多，父母担心她们会受到攻击或骚扰;[5]而对男孩来说，交通安全被视为最大的威胁。在新一代人中，拥有自行车的人数翻了一番，但“独立活动能力”-----无人看管的行动或探险的能力-----已经急剧下降。譬如，在奥克兰，许多小学都规定自行车要拆除座后架，因为人们觉得街上太不安全。克赖斯特彻奇市是新西兰最适合骑自行车的城市，但在那里，小学生骑车上学的比例也从20世纪70年代末期的90%多下降到了目前的不到20%。孩子们被安全地绑在4X4家用越野车内，开车从家里送到校门口，然后送去跳芭蕾、踢足球或学游泳-----很少离开大人关注的视线内。

　　[6]新泽西州一位小学副校长、曲棍球教练博比·舒尔兹在美国《体育、娱乐与舞蹈》杂志中写道：放学后与小区里的孩子一起在街上玩-----他们自己创立规则，自己做决定和解决争端-----这是真正可以学到本领的地方。“街道是我获得生活技能最大的源泉之一。”她说，“[6]如今我再也看不到‘在街上玩耍’的场景了。我看到的只是一些成人组织的活动。父母亲却没有意识到，他们孩子的个性发展中极其重要的一部分正在烟消云散。”

　　孩子们被自行车头盔、车用专座、“安全”运动场和防晒遮光剂等精心保护着，这明显地向他们传递了这样的信息：这个世界充满着危险-----而且他们涉世尚浅，无力独自应付。但研究却一再表明，年轻人远比我们所想象的能干得多。新西兰儿童问题中心主任安妮·史密斯教授说：“许多成年人不能理解的是，如果孩子总被阻拦着或保护着，他们将永远学不会长大。”

　　教育心理学家保罗·普朗格雷认为，该是把孩子的保护套拿掉的时候了。他认为：做父母的几乎快成为幻想狂了，以至于制造了一代幼稚、不可靠的年轻人，他们潜意识里得到的教育是，自己没有独立处理事情的能力。“适应能力以及抵挡压力和诱惑的能力，是后天学会的技能，”普朗格雷解释说，“如果你把孩子裹在棉絮当中，不给他们冒险的机会，他们日后就更有可能缺乏做出负责任的决定的能力。”

　　父母应该有正确的判断力

　　[7]可悲的是，一例例触目惊心的孩子被诱拐并谋杀的案件------例如英国的10女孩霍莉·韦尔斯和杰西卡·查普曼案;澳大利亚5岁女孩克洛伊·霍森，就在离她住的地方200米处发现了她的尸体;还有6岁的新西兰女孩特莉莎·科马克，在去学校的路上被人掳走------所起的作用，无非是加深了父母亲心中的恐惧。譬如，特莉莎·科马克的死亡是新西兰罕见的随意诱拐儿童的案件之一。在澳大利亚，15岁以下的青少年被陌生人谋杀的概率据估计是四百万分之一。而孩子遭受来自家庭成员或熟人的危险的可能性要大得多。

　　不过，父母的恐惧颇具感染性。在英国的一项研究中，担心被陌生人袭击的孩子比担心被汽车撞的要多得多。简·帕克和简·斯廷普森在她们的育儿书《让孩子快乐无忧》中写道：“我们正在丧失正确判断和能力。教育孩子掌握确保安全的技能，与在此过程中对他们进行不必要的限制和带给他们不必要的恐惧，这两者之间，每个父母都必须对自己的套路细加惦量。”

　　[8]奥塔哥大学的规划专家克莱尔·弗里曼博士指出公众责任感的削弱是人们之间互不信任的又一牺牲品。就在不久以前，成年人能认识当地所有的小孩，可以充当小区内孩子们的非正式监护人。“如今，特别是如果你是一位男士，你在向一个迷路的孩子伸出援手时可能要犹豫一番，生怕人家会怀疑你的动机。”

　　给孩子更多的空间和关注

　　作为20世纪90年代中期的规划专家，弗里曼开始关注因发展而造成的绿色地带丧失、随意玩耍的去处减少等问题。在一项关于英国利兹市儿童如何过暑假的研究中，她发现：与他们父母的童年经历相比，现在孩子探险的自由严重受到限制-----有时候，只许在自家的前院里玩。弗里曼说，她不记得自己小时曾在屋子里待着过，也没有一个人独自玩耍的情况。成长就是要成为群体的一分子。[9]如今已是四个孩子母亲的弗里曼认为，“只许在家玩”的做法剥夺了孩子们成为社会一员的归属意识。

　　不过，弗里曼又说道：孩子们的需求已开始得到越来越多的重视了。[10]在荷兰，人们划出了适合孩子们待的“家居区”，这一区域对行人优先，对车辆进行限制;根据孩子们应当学会如何与水安全相处的原则，池塘被规划进了居住的房产地块内，而不是让其仅存于荒效野地。毕竟，就像《海底总动员》中一只聪明的鱼所说的那样，跟你的孩子说“永远不会有事的”是很成问题的，因为如果你这么说的话，那他也就不能经历任何事情了。

　　1.According to Brickland,parents nowadays have changed their____________.

　　A)standards of the children's proper dressing

　　B)worry about the children's personal safety

　　C)ways to communicate with children

　　D)confidence in the children's ability

　　2.When Brickland and her sister were little,they kept the home keybecause_____________.

　　A)they wanted to be trusted

　　B)their mother had to work

　　C)their mother didn't live at home

　　D)they were very naughty and wild

　　3.Mayer Hillman indicates that children now have less and less_____________.

　　A)space for playing

　　B)contact with animals

　　C)concern about others

　　D)knowledge about nature

　　4.Paul Tranter finds that eighty percent of the children were allowed to visit placesother than school alone in_____________.

　　A)Australia

　　B)New Zealand

　　C)Germany

　　D)Britain

　　5.What is ranked by parents as the greatest threat to boys?

　　A)Gang crimes.

　　B)Online games.

　　C)Extreme sports.

　　D)Dangerous traffics.

　　6.Bobbie Schultz points out that real learning takes place in______________.

　　A)on-the-street play

　　B)adult-organized activities

　　C)student-centered teaching

　　D)home and nature

　　7.What accident had happened to a little girl called Chloe Hoson?

　　A)She was robbed on her way to school.

　　B)She was kidnapped and murdered.

　　C)She fell a victim to domestic violence.

　　D)She disappeared for no reason.

　　8.Claire Freeman thinks that lack of mutual trust results in__________________.

　　9.Freeman concludes that kids are robbed of their sense of belonging to the societyby___________________.

　　10.Netherlands has placed the rights of pedestrians before those of cars in such areascalled____________.

　　1.[D][定位]首段末句。

　　解析：题止中的changed与原文该句中的altered为同义词，可见altered的宾语confidence为答案的关键间，在4个选项中，只有D与confidence有关，为本题答案。A中的dressing试图将考生的注意力转移到首段倒数第2句的boxers(四脚裤)和undies(内衣)，虽然这两个词比较陌生，但看到该句末的haven't changed，就无须考虑太多，可以肯定A并非本题答案。其他两个选项的内容在原文并未提及。

　　2.[B][定位]根据题干中的Brickland, her sister及home key定位到第1个小标题Worry-ridden Parents and Stifled Kids下首段第2句。

　　解析：原文该句中的...so...表明了与题干要求的同样的因果关系，so前面提到的原因与B相同，因此本题应选B。其他选项均来提及。

　　3.[A][定位]根据题干中的Mayer Hillman定位到笫1个小标题Worry-ridde Parents and Stifled Kids下第3段第3句。

　　解析：该句中的contracted与less and less意思相近，与contracted前的play zone

　　同义的选项为本题答案，因此A为本题答案。要小心B。原文该句中提到的henhouse chickens可能会误导考生选择B.事宴上，henhouse chickens用于比喻受过分保护的小孩，与animals没有关系。

　　4.[C][定位]根据题干中的allowed to visit places 和school alone定位到第2个小标题Parents Wrap Kids up in Cotton Wool下首段末句。

　　解析：原文该段提到多个国家的名称，只要按照题干中的eighty percent，再结合选项中的国家名称。应该很快可以确定本题答案为C。

　　5.[D][定位]根据the greatest threat to boys定位到第2个小标题Parents Wrap Kids up in Cotton Wool下第2段首句。

　　解析：原文该句while引出的分句明确表明traffic dangers是对男孩最大的安全威胁，D是对traffic dangers的同义改写，为本题答案。

　　6.[A][定位]根据题干中的Bobbie Schultz和rcal learning定位到第2个小标题Parents Wrap Kids up in Cotton Wool下第3段首句和第3句。

　　解析：将首句中破折号前后的内容结合起来可以知道playing in the street after school with neighbourhood kids就是真正学到本领的地方。在该段第3句Bobbie Schultz将此简称为on-the-street play，因此A为本题答案。

　　7.[B][定位]根据题干中的Chloe Hoson定位到第3个小标题Parents Should Gain Proper Perspective下首段首句。

　　解析：该句笫2个分句中的body暗示Chloe Hoson被murdered(该句开头提到的)，因此本题应选B。本段提到的是kidnap和murder，其他选项提到的各种罪案在原文并未提及。

　　8.[the erosion of community responsibility]

　　[定位]根据题干中的Claire Freeman和mutual定位到第3个小标题Parents Should Gain Proper Perspective下末段首句。

　　解析：空白处应为名词(词组)。原文该句中的...as another casualty of...，表明mutual distrust导致the erosion of community responsibility，题目中的lack of mutual trust是对mutual distrust的同义改写，由此可见，the erosion of community responsibility为本题答案。

　　9.[the“domestication of play”]

　　[定位]根据题干中的Freeman和kids are robbed of their sense定位到最后一个小标题More Space and More Attention to Kids’Needs下首段末句。

　　解析：空白处应为名词(词组)。对比原文与题目可见，两个句子的语态相反：原文rob为主动语态，而题目中rob为被动语态，两句的主语和宾语位置相反，所以原文rob的主语the“domestication of play”即为本题答案。

　　10.[child-friendly“home zones”]

　　[定位]根据题干中的The Netherlands和pedestrians定位到最后一个小标题 More Space and More Attention to Kids' Needs下末段第2句。

　　解析：空白处应为名词(词组)。题干与原文中where引出的定语从句内容相同，两句对比可见.题目中缺少了原句中的主语child-friendly“home zones”。