歡迎進入：2010考研課程免費試聽　　更多信息請訪問：考研 論壇

　　What do babies know?

　　As Daniel Haworth is settled into a high chair and wheeled behind a black screen, a sudden look of worry furrows his 9-month-old brow. His dark blue eyes dart left and right in search of the familiar reassurance of his mother’s face. She calls his name and makes soothing noises, but Daniel senses something unusual is happening. He sucks his fingers for comfort, but, finding no solace, his mouth crumples, his body stiffens, and he lets rip an almighty shriek of distress. Mom picks him up, reassures him, and two minutes later, a chortling and alert Daniel returns to the darkened booth behind the screen and submits himself to Babylab, a unit set up in 2005 at the University of Manchester in northwest England to investigate how babies think.

　　Watching infants piece life together, seeing their senses, emotions and motor skills take shape, is a source of mystery and endless fascination—at least to parents and developmental psychologists. We can decode their signals of distress or read a million messages into their first smile. But how much do we really know about what’s going on behind those wide, innocent eyes? How much of their understanding of and response to the world comes preloaded at birth? How much is built from scratch by experience? Such are the questions being explored at Babylab. Though the facility is just 18 months old and has tested only 100 infants, it’s already challenging current thinking on what babies know and how they come to know it.

　　Daniel is now engrossed in watching video clips of a red toy train on a circular track. The train disappears into a tunnel and emerges on the other side. A hidden device above the screen is tracking Daniel’s eyes as they follow the train and measuring the diameter of his pupils 50 times a second. As the child gets bored—or “habituated”, as psychologists call the process—his attention level steadily drops. But it picks up a little whenever some novelty is introduced. The train might be green, or it might be blue. And sometimes an impossible thing happens—the train goes into the tunnel one color and comes out another.

　　Variations of experiments like this one, examining infant attention, have been a standard tool of developmental psychology ever since the Swiss pioneer of the field, Jean Piaget, started experimenting on his children in the 1920s. Piaget’s work led him to conclude that infants younger than 9 months have no innate knowledge of how the world works or any sense of “object permanence” (that people and things still exist even when they’re not seen). Instead, babies must gradually construct this knowledge from experience. Piaget’s “constructivist” theories were massively influential on postwar educators and psychologists, but over the past 20 years or so they have been largely set aside by a new generation of “nativist” psychologists and cognitive scientists whose more sophisticated experiments led them to theorize that infants arrive already equipped with some knowledge of the physical world and even rudimentary programming for math and language. Babylab director Sylvain Sirois has been putting these smart-baby theories through a rigorous set of tests. His conclusions so far tend to be more Piagetian: “Babies,” he says, “know squat.”

　　考研詞匯：

　　reassure[ˌri:əˈʃuə]

　　vt.使……安心，再保證，使……恢復信心，打消……的疑慮

　　source[sɔ:s]

　　n.①源，源泉;②來源，出處

　　[真題例句] (73) Over the years, tools and technology themselves as a source (①) of fundamental innovation have largely been ignored by historians and philosophers of science.[1994年翻譯]

　　[例句精譯] (73)工具和技術(shù)本身作為根本性創(chuàng)新的源泉，多年來在很大程度上被歷史學家和科學思想家們忽視了。

　　[真題例句] Strangers and travelers were welcome sources (②) of diversion, and brought news of the outside world.[1997年閱讀2]

　　[例句精譯] 陌生人和旅行者帶來了娛樂消遣，還帶來了外面世界的消息，因而他們很受歡迎。

　　scratch[skrætʃ]

　　v.抓，搔，扒;n.①抓，搔，抓痕;②起跑線