“屏幕时间”对儿童有害吗？

By+Alison+Gopnik

I was in the garden with Augie， my four-year-old grandson， watching the bees in the lavender1. “Bees make honey，” I said， transmitting the wisdom of the ages in good grandmotherly fashion.2 After a pause， Augie replied， “How do they make the honey？” There is nothing like a childs question for exposing3 the limits of a grandmothers wisdom.

“Actually， Augie， I dont know，” I said.

“But， Grandmom， you have your phone，” he said. For Augie， a smartphone is as natural and unremarkable as the bees and the lavender， and holding one is almost synonymous with knowing.4

I Googled “How do bees make honey？” There were dozens of videos explaining it. As we stood in the garden， shielding the screen against the sunlight， Augie and I learned that worker bees secrete an enzyme called invertase， which converts nectar into dextrose， then flap their wings to thicken the nectar into honey.5

“Its kind of hard to see the bees，” I said， squinting6 at the screen.

“Why dont we watch it on the big computer？” Augie said.

For the next hour， we sat inside， bee-surfing.7 Someone in Sweden had posted a speeded-up video of bees building a hive， months of construction compressed into two minutes.8 There was a whole subgenre of beekeeper selfie videos.9 Best of all was a BBC documentary about the“waggle dance，” the remarkable communication system that allows bees to give one another directions to the places where theyve found nectar.10

My own childhood was dominated by a powerful device that used an optical interface to transport the user to an alternate reality.11 I spent most of my waking hours in its grip， oblivious of the world around me.12 The device was， of course， the book. Over time， reading hijacked my brain， as large areas once dedicated to processing the “real” world adapted to processing the printed word.13 As far as I can tell， this early immersion didnt hamper my development， but it did leave me with some illusions14—my idea of romantic love surely came from novels.

English childrens books， in particular， are full of tantalizing15 food descriptions. At some point in my childhood， I must have read about a honeycomb16 tea. Augie， enchanted17， agreed to accompany me to the grocery store. We returned with a jar of honeycomb， only to find that it was an inedible， waxy mess.18

Many parents worry that “screen time” will impair19 childrens development， but recent research suggests that most of the common fears about children and screens are unfounded.（There is one exception： looking at screens that emit20 blue light before bed really does disrupt sleep， in people of all ages.） The American Academy of Pediatrics21 used to recommend strict restrictions on screen exposure. In 2015， the organization examined the relevant science more thoroughly， and， as a result， changed its recommendations. The new guidelines emphasize that what matters is content and context， what children watch and with whom. Each child， after all， will have some hundred thousand hours of conscious experience before turning 16. Those hours can be like the marvellous ones that Augie and I spent together bee-watching， or they can be violent or mindless22—and thats true whether those hours are occupied by apps or TV or books or just by talk.

New tools have always led to panicky speculation.23 Socrates thought that reading and writing would have disastrous effects on memory； the novel， the telegraph， the telephone， and the television were all declared to be the End of Civilization as We Know It， particularly in the hands of the young.24 Part of the reason may be that adult brains require a lot of focus and effort to learn something new， while childrens brains are designed to master new environments spontaneously.25 Innovative technologies always seem distracting and disturbing to the adults attempting to master them， and transparent and obvious26—not really technology at all—to those， like Augie， who encounter them as children.

Like the bees， we live by the reports of others. Unlike the bees， we can invent new worlds， constructing them out of sonic vibrations， ink， or pixels.27 Sometimes those worlds deceive and confuse； at other times， they tell us something revelatory28. When Augies father got home， Augie rushed to meet him， his words tumbling29 out in excitement. “Daddy， Daddy， look，” he said， reaching for the phone. “Do you know how bees make honey？ Ill show you...”

1. lavender： 薰衣草。

2.“蜜蜂會酿蜂蜜。”我说道，以祖母和蔼的口吻向他传递岁月的智慧。transmit： 传播，传递。

3. expose： 暴露，揭露。

4. 对于奥吉来说，智能手机就和蜜蜂、薰衣草一样自然平常，而且拥有一部手机就意味着无所不知。unremarkable： 平凡的，平常的；synonymous： 与……同义的。

5. 我们站在花园里，用手挡住射在屏幕上的阳光，从手机里了解到，工蜂分泌出转化酶，这种转化酶把花蜜变成葡萄糖，然后它们扇动翅膀使花蜜变得浓稠，从而形成蜂蜜。shield： 遮挡；secrete： 分泌；enzyme： 酶；invertase： 转化酶，蔗糖酶；convert： 转化，改变；nectar： 花蜜；dextrose： 葡萄糖；flap： 拍动，振翅。

6. squint： 眯着眼看。

7. bee-surfing： 上网搜索关于蜜蜂的知识，源于net-surfing一词，即网上冲浪。

8. speeded-up video： 快进视频；hive： 蜂巢，蜂箱；compress： 压缩，精简。

9. subgenre： 亚类，子类型；selfie： 自拍。

10. 最好的视频是英国广播公司制作的一个关于“蜜蜂摇摆舞”的纪录片，摇摆舞是一种奇特的交流方法，帮助蜜蜂彼此间传达蜜源的所在。waggle dance：（蜜蜂以此指明蜜源地点的）摇摆舞。

11. 在我童年时期，流行一种通过视觉界面令人置身于另一个现实世界的工具。optical： 视觉的，眼睛的；interface： 界面；alternate： 交替的。

12. in ones grip： 在……的掌握或控制之中；oblivious： 忘却的，不注意的。

13. 慢慢地，阅读占据了我的大脑，曾经用来处理“现实”世界的大部分脑力开始适应着去处理文字世界。hijack： 劫持，绑架。

14. immersion： 沉浸，沉醉；hamper： 妨碍，限制；illusion： 幻想，想象。

15. tantalizing： 撩人的，逗人的。

16. honeycomb： 蜂巢。

17. enchant： 入迷的，陶醉的。

18. 我们买回来一罐蜂巢，结果却发现是不能吃的、像蜡似的东西。inedible： 不能吃的；waxy： 蜡质的，似蜡的。

19. impair： 损害。

20. emit： 发射，发出。

21. American Academy of Pediatrics： 美国儿科学会。

22. marvellous： 绝妙的，极好的；mindless：不动脑子的，不用心的。

23. panicky： 恐慌的，紧张不安的；speculation： 猜测。

24. 苏格拉底认为读书和写作会对人的记忆力产生灾难性的影响；小说、电报、电话和电视都曾被称作“正如我们所知”的“文明的终结者”，特别是当它们落在年轻人手里的时候。Socrates： 苏格拉底（469BC—399BC），古希腊哲学家，认为哲学在于认识自我；the End of Civilization as We Know It： 该句出自1977年的美国电影The Strange Case of the End of Civilization as We Know It（《我们所知道的文明终结的奇案》）。

25. 部分原因是成人的大脑需要高度集中和耗费大量精力才能学会新东西，而儿童的大脑天生就能轻松自然地掌控新的环境。spontaneously： 自发地，不由自主地。

26. distracting： 使人分心的；transparent： 浅显易懂的，一目了然的。

27. 和蜜蜂不同的是，我们可以用声波振动、墨水和像素创造出新的世界。sonic：音波的，声音的；vibration： 振动，摆动；pixel：（显示器或电视机图像的）像素。

28. revelatory： 启示性的，揭示性的。

29. tumble： 跌跌撞撞地走，这里指孩童说话不连贯。