As a front-line teacher, I have long been accustomed to the students' various "finding faults".
For example, when they read Xin Zhiyi's "Seven or Eight Stars Outside the Sky, Two or Three O'Clock Before the Rainy Mountain", they will question: "Will there really be stars when it rains?" For example, when reading Zhang Ji's "Midnight Bell to the Passenger Ship", he will question: "Which temple will ring the bell in the middle of the night, and is not afraid of affecting the rest of the people next to it?" For example, when reading "the black geese fly high in the moon", they will ask: "The last sentence clearly says that it is a snowy day, where do the geese fly high on the snow day?" ”
The above 3 questions seem to be a bit "leveraged", but it is really not just children who do not understand. The second problem of ringing the bell in the middle of the night, Ouyang Xiu could not figure it out at that time, because he did not understand the local customs of Suzhou; the third mathematician Hua Luogeng did not think it through, and he had also written a poem to play oil, and now many northerners said that it was indeed possible that there was a situation where geese flew on snowy days.
The above 3 "looking for stubble", many teachers can barely answer it, but this question that I want to talk to everyone in this issue has made my colleagues difficult. This question was encountered by a Chinese teacher in our teaching and research department, aimed at a classic work that has been circulated more than 2,000 years ago: "Sandpiper Clams Fight".
"The Battle of the Sandpipers and Clams" is from the "Warring States Policy", and the question asked by the students is: "How do you talk when your mouth is caught?" "Why is this question so difficult for the teacher?" Let's take a look at the full text:
Zhao and Yan, Su Dai for Yan Hui Wang: "Now the subject comes, and it is easy to pass the water." The mussel is exposed, and the sandpiper pecks at its flesh, and the mussel merges and clamps its beak. The sandpiper said: 'There is no rain today, no rain tomorrow, that is, there are dead clams!' The mussel is also called the sandpiper: "If it does not come out today, it will not come out tomorrow, that is, there will be a dead sandpiper!" 'The two will not give up, and the fisherman shall take advantage of them. Now Zhao and Yan, Yan Zhao long support, to harm the public. The subject feared that Qin Zhi was also a fisherman. May the king's skill be the same! Hui Wang: "Goodness." "It's over.
This passage is saying that the State of Zhao said that it was going to attack the State of Yan, so the King of Yan sent his adviser Su Dai to persuade the King of Zhao not to send troops. Su Dai was an eloquent man, and he told king Zhao a story of "The Battle of the Sandpipers and Clams", indicating that if the two kingdoms of Yan and Zhao fought, it would be Qin who would benefit. The story of Sudai is about a river mussel basking in the sun by the river, and a water bird bites it. The river mussel then quickly closed its shell and clamped the mouth of the water bird. So there was an interesting conversation between them, and the river mussel said that as long as I didn't come out, the water bird would die in two days; the water bird thought that as long as I kept biting and not letting it go, the river mussel would die of thirst in two days.
This parable is indeed very educational, and it also allows us to learn the idiom of "sandpipers and clams fighting". But as the student suggests, since the water bird's mouth is caught, how does it talk to the river mussel? We all know that fables are actually fairytale stories, so we can accept that the animals in the fables can speak and think, but it does not mean that students can accept the logically unreasonable content.
In fact, the skepticism about "The Clam Fight" is not just my colleagues who have been embarrassed, this issue has been raised many years ago and is a point that has always been controversial. So why didn't the textbook delete it? Obviously, this is because the article itself is very valuable.
On the one hand, although there are many fables in our country, there are not many such familiar and understandable profound truths as "The Clam Fights". In addition to such a fable, the author really can't think of any better way for children to understand what is called "fisherman's profit".
On the other hand, it is extremely literary. Primary school education itself is to let children learn how to write, how to describe a dialogue, which is why they can look at the picture and speak, and this text is very particular about the use of words.
Finally, this fable is from the Warring States Policy, a very famous history book of national styles, with 497 extant books, and its historical and literary value is extremely high. When the teacher told this fable, he definitely wanted to introduce the "Warring States Policy", so it was necessary to let the children know that there was such a history book through this story.
Knowing this, everyone should be able to understand why "Sandpiper Scramble" was not deleted. So the question is, did Liu Xiang, the historian who compiled the Warring States Policy, and the students of successive dynasties and dynasties not find this unreasonableness? Personally, I think it's not that they don't find out, it's that they don't care.
Starting from pre-Qin literature, the Four Books and Five Classics and the Hundred Sons and Hundred Schools discussed the regular body after all things. In order to illustrate this law, strategists and historians will use various methods of expression, as long as the truth behind the matter can be accepted, everyone generally will not have any doubts. This is not imprecise, but is determined by the characteristics of literary expression. From this point of view, the ancients are really right. What do you think about this? Discussion is welcome.