初次尝试，做的不好请多多包涵

--文章版权属于《经济学人》杂志

Helicopter parents

Relax（slowdown/calm down ）yourkids will be fine（allright/okay/well）

Middle-class parents should give theirchildren more freedom（independence）

IN1693 the philosopher John Locke warned that（哲学家表明观点）children should not be given too much “unwholesome （harmful/noxious/nasty） fruit”to eat. Three centuries later, misguided（显示作者观点）ideas（thoughts） aboutchild-rearing are still rife （common/widespread/prevalent）.Many parents fret (worry/fuss/trouble/bother) thattheir offspring (children) willdie unless ceaselessly (incessantly) watched.In America the law can be equally (similarly/likewise/in the sameway/uniformly) paranoid.In South Carolina this month Debra Harrell was jailed for letting hernine-year-old daughter play in a park unsupervised. The child, who had a mobilephone and had not been harmed inanyway (inany case)（显示作者观点）,was briefly taken into custody (protection)ofthe social services.

1、借用哲学家的话来引出文章 2、说明现在的的总体情况misguided一词显示了作者的态度，即：不支持这种说法

3、4两句用具体事例来说明现在的情况，第4句中in anyway一词也体现了作者的态度，认为这样很荒谬。

MsHarrell’s draconian punishment (penalty) reflectsthe rich world’s angst (anxiety/fear) aboutparenting. By most objective measures,modern parents are far more conscientious (careful/thorough/meticulous)than previous (earlier/prior/反subsequent)generations.Since 1965 labor-saving devices such as washing machines and ready meals havefreed eight hours a week for the average Americancouple, but slightlymore than all of that time has beenswallowed up by childcare. Dads are far more hands-onthan their fathers were, and working mothers spend more time nurturing their sprogsthan the housewives of the 1960s did. This works for both sides: children needlove and stimulation（inspiration/motivation）;  and for the parents, reading to a child orplaying ball games in the garden is more fulfilling(satisfying/rewarding/反 frustrating)  than washing dishes.

Thereare two blots in this picture, connected to class. Oneis at the lower end. Even if poor parents spend more time with their childrenthan they once did, they spend less than rich parents do—andthey struggle to provide enough support, especially in the crucial （important/vital/critical/early/key）years (see page 21). America is a laggard here;its government spends abundantly (plentifully) onschool-age kids but much less than other rich countries on the first two or threeyears of life. As this newspaper has pointed out before, if America did more tohelp poor parents with young children, it would yield huge returns.

Thesecond problem, less easy to prove, occurs at the other endof the income scale, and may even apply to otherwiserational Economist readers: well-educated, rich parents try to do too much (seepage 25). Safety is part of it: they fear that if they are not constantly(continually /continuously) vigilanttheir children may break their necks or eat a cupcake that has fallen on thefloor. Over-coaching is another symptom. Parents fear that unless they drive theiroffspring to Mandarin classes, violin lessons and fencing practice six times aweek, they will not get into the right university. The streets of Palo Alto andChelsea are cloggedwith people-carriers hauling children from one educationalevent to another.

Thefear about safety is the least rational.Despite the impression (feeling) youget from watching crime dramas, children in rich countries are mind-bogglingly safe, so long as（aslong as/ provided that）they look both ways before crossing theroad. Kids in the 1950s—that golden era so often evokedby conservative politicians—were in fact five times likelier to die before theage of five. Yet their parents thought nothing of letting them roamfree. In those days, most American children walked or biked to school; nowbarely (just/ scarcely/hardly)10%do, prevented by jittery (nervous)parents. Children learn how to handle risks by taking a few, such as climbingtrees or taking the train, even if that means scraped knees and seeing theoccasional weirdo. Freedom is exhilarating (exciting/lifting).It also fosters self-reliance.

Get out of that helicopter

Theother popular parental fear—thatyour children might not get into an IvyLeague college—is more rational. Academic success matters more than everbefore. But beyond a certain point,parenting makes less difference than many parents imagine. Studies in Minnesotaand Sweden, for example, found that identicaltwins grew up equally intelligent whether they were raised together or apart. Astudy in Colorado found that children adopted and raised by brainy(bright/ intelligent) parents ended up no brainier than thoseadopted by average parents. Genes appear to matter more than upbringingin the jobs market, too. In a big study of Korean children adopted in America,those raised by the richest families grew up to earn no more than those adoptedby the poorest families.

This does not mean that parenting isirrelevant (immaterial/unrelated).The families who adopt children are carefully screened, so they tend to bewarm, capable (competent) andmiddle-class. But the twin and adoption studies indicate (pointout/show/signify) that any child given a loving home andadequate (sufficient/ample/enough/plenty) stimulationis likely to fulfill (complete)her potential. Put another way,better-off parents can afford to relax a bit. Your kids will be fine if you hover over them less and let them frolic(play)inthe sun from time to time. You maybe happier, too, if you spend the extra (more)time indulging your own hobbies—or sleeping. And if you are less stressed, yourchildren will appreciate it, even if you still make them eat their fruit andvegetables.