Hi Sheila,
Sorry, not to reply to this before:
Charles wrote -
  >-> upset, >so his mother asked him what was wrong.  He explained that he
  >-> >couldn't read what was on the page - it made no sense and didn't
  >-> >look at all like words written in a book.
I replied -
SK>-> Of course, he was upset. He would be just as upset if he'd tried to
  >-> read a book that he was not ready to read yet. IMHO, the mother
  >-> should have explained to her son that the author of the book was a
  >-> lot older than him and had years of practising reading and writing.
You added -
SK>Read again what Charles wrote. The author of the book was the boy
  >himself. He was upset that he could not read what he, himself, had
  >written only on that same day.
The problem, here, was not in my understanding of what Charles wrote,
but in the fact that I did not make myself fully understood in the point
I was trying to get across.  :(
I realized that the child was upset that he could not read what he had
written that day. My point was that the child was expecting himself to
be able to read and write as well as an adult and that is impossible
even for  the child that can read what they have written.
Understand what I meant now?
                        -Ruth
---
 þ QMPro 1.53 þ Sorry, I'm late - a pile-up on the information highway.
---------------