问答题Sixty-three years after U.S. forces vanquished the Japanese and planted the Stars and Stripes atop Iwo Jima"s Mount Suribachi, the remote outpost in the Volcano Islands is the focus of another pitched battle. This time film directors Clint Eastwood and Spike Lee are sparring over the accuracy of Eastwood"s two films about the clash, Flags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima. Lee has claimed that by soft-pedaling the role of African Americans in the battle, Eastwood has whitewashed history. "Clint Eastwood made two films about Iwo Jima that ran for more than four hours total, and there was not one Negro actor on the screen," Lee said last month at the Cannes Film Festival. "In his version of Iwo Jima, Negro soldiers did not exist." Eastwood bristled at the charge. "Has he ever studied history? [African-American soldiers] didn"t raise the flag," he countered in an interview with the British newspaper The Guardian. "If I go ahead and put an African-American actor in there, people"d go, "This guy"s lost his mind."" Eastwood also suggested Lee should "shut his face". That didn"t go down so well. Eastwood "is not my father, and we"re not on a plantation either," Lee fumed. "I"m not making this up. I know history." History, as it turns out, is on both their sides. Lee is correct that African Americans played a key role in World War II, in which more than 1 million black servicemen helped topple the Axis powers. He is correct too in pointing out that African-American forces made significant contributions to the fight for Iwo Jima. An estimated 700 to 900 African Americans, trained in segregated boot camps, participated in the landmark battle, which claimed the lives of about 6,800 servicemen, nearly all Marines. Racial prejudice shunted blacks into supply roles in Iwo Jima, but that didn"t mean they were safe. Under enemy fire, they braved perilous beach landings, unloaded and shuttled ammunition to the front lines and weathered Japanese onslaughts on their positions. "Shells, mortar and hand grenades don"t know the difference of color," says Thomas McPhatter, an African-American Marine who hauled ammo during the battle. "Everybody out there was trying to cover their butts to survive." But Eastwood"s portrayal of the battle is also essentially accurate. Flags of Our Fathers zeroes in on the soldiers who hoisted the U.S. flag on Mount Suribachi. None of the six servicemen seen in Joe Rosenthal"s famous photograph—the iconic image depicts the second flag-raising attempt; the first wasn"t visible to other U.S. troops on Iwo Jima—were black. (Eastwood"s other film, Letters from Iwo Jima , is told largely from the perspective of Japanese soldiers.) Eastwood is also correct that black soldiers represented only a small fraction of the total force deployed on the island. That may be true, but it is not enough to placate Yvonne Latty, the author of a book about African-American veterans. Given the hazards of their mission and the virulent racism they endured—McPhatter says he has to execute his mission without giving orders to white troops, even if they were needed—Latty argues that black soldiers warrant more than fleeting inclusion in the film. Christopher Paul Moore, author of a book about black soldiers in World War II, praises Eastwood"s rendering of the battle but laments the limited role it accords African Americans. "Without black labor," he says, "we would"ve seen a much different ending to the war." Adds Latty: "The way America learns history, unfortunately, is through movies." Eastwood poignantly memorialized a heroic chapter in American warfare. But using a wider-angle lens might have brought into sharper focus a group often elbowed to history"s fringes.

问答题 Directions: In this part of the test, you will hear 2 passages in English. You will hear the passages ONLY ONCE. After you have heard each passage, translate it into Chinese and write your version in the corresponding space in your ANSWER BOOKLET. You may take notes while you are listening.

问答题Robots came into the world as a literary device whereby the writers and film-makers of the early 20th century could explore their hopes and fears about technology, as the era of the automobile, telephone and aeroplane picked up its reckless jazz-age speed. Since moving from the page and screen to real life, robots have been a mild disappointment. They do some things that humans cannot do themselves, like exploring Mars, and a host of things people do not much want to do, like dealing with unexploded bombs or vacuuming floors. And they are very useful in bits of manufacturing. 　　But reliable robots-especially ones required to work beyond the safety cages of a factory floor—have proved hard to make, and robots are still pretty stupid. So although they fascinate people, they have not yet made much of a mark on the world. That seems about to change. The dramatic growth in the power of silicon chips, digital sensors and high bandwidth communications improves robots just as it improves all sorts of other products.

问答题For America"s colleges, January is a month of reckoning. Most applications for the next academic year beginning in the autumn have to be made by the end of December, so a university"s popularity is put to an objective standard, how many people want to attend. One of the more unlikely offices to have been flooded with mail is that of the City University of New York (CUNY), a public college that lacks, among other things, a famous sports team, bucolic campuses and raucous parties (it doesn"t even have dorms), and, until recently, academic credibility. A primary draw at CUNY is a programme for particularly clever students, launched in 2001. Some 1,100 of the 60,000 students at CUNY"s five top schools receive a rare thing in the costly world of American colleges, free education. Those accepted by CUNY"s honours programme pay no tuition fees; instead they receive a stipend of $ 7,500 (to help with general expenses) and a laptop computer. Applications for early admissions into next year"s programme are up 70%. Admission has nothing to do with being an athlete, or a child of an alumnus, or having an influential sponsor, or being a member of a particularly aggrieved ethnic group—criteria that are increasingly important at America"s elite colleges. Most of the students who apply to the honours programme come from relatively poor families, many of them immigrant ones. All that CUNY demands is that these students be diligent and clever. Last year, the average standardized test score of this group was in the top 7% in the country. Among the rest of CUNY"s students averages are lower, but they are now just breaking into the top third (compared with the bottom third in 1997). CUNY does not appear alongside Harvard and Stanford on lists of America"s top colleges, but its recent transformation offers a neat parable of meritocracy revisited. Until the 1960s, a good case could be made that the best deal in American tertiary education was to be found not in Cambridge or Palo Alto, but in Harlem, at a small public school called City College, the core of CUNY. America"s first free municipal university, founded in 1847, offered its services to everyone bright enough to meet its gruelling standards. City"s golden era came in the last century, when America"s best known colleges restricted the number of Jewish students they would admit at exactly the time when New York was teeming with the bright children of poor Jewish immigrants. In 1933—1954 City produced nine future Nobel laureates. But in the second half of the last century, CUNY once lost its glamour. What went wrong? Put simply, City dropped its standards. It was partly to do with demography, partly to do with earnest muddleheadedness. In the 1960s, universities across the country faced intense pressure to admit more minority students. Although City was open to all races, only a small number of black and Hispanic students passed the strict. That, critics decided, could not be squared with City"s mission to "serve all the citizens of New York". At first the standards were tweaked, but this was not enough, and in 1969 massive student protests shut down City"s campus for two weeks. Faced with upheaval, City scrapped its admissions standards altogether. By 1970, almost any student who graduated from New York"s high schools could attend. The quality of education collapsed. At first, with no barrier to entry, enrolment climbed, but in 1976 the city of New York, which was then in effect bankrupt, forced CUNY to impose tuition fees. An era of free education was over, and a university which had once served such a distinct purpose joined the muddle of America"s lower-end education. By 1997, seven out of ten first-year students in the CUNY system were failing at least one remedial test in reading, writing or maths (meaning that they had not learnt it to high- school standard). A report commissioned by the city in 1999 concluded that "central to CUNY"s historic mission is a commitment to provide broad access, but its students" high drop-out rates and low graduation rates raise the question: "Access to what?"". Using the report as ammunition, profound reforms were pushed through by New York"s then mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, and another alumnus, Herman Badillo (1951), America"s first Puerto Rican congressman. A new head of CUNY was appointed. Matthew Goldstein, a mathematician (1963), has shifted the focus back towards higher standards amid considerable controversy. For instance, by 2001, all of CUNY"s 11 "senior" colleges (i.e., ones that offer full four-year courses) had stopped offering remedial education. Admissions standards have been raised. Students applying to CUNY"s senior colleges now need respectable scores on either a national, state or CUNY test, and the admissions criteria for the honours programme are the toughest in the university"s history. Contrary to what Mr. Goldstein"s critics predicted, higher standards have attracted more students, not fewer: this year, enrolment at CUNY is at a record high. There are also anecdotal signs that CUNY is once again picking up bright locals, especially in science.

问答题____________________________________________________________

问答题If you thought that only women on the heavier side felt bad about their bodies after being bombarded with images of stick thin models, well, you'd better think again, for the affliction is common to all members of the fairer sex. And, it doesn't take a week or a month or even a year for those negative feelings to set in, but only three minutes. In a recent study, researchers measured how some women felt about themselves, from their body weight to their hair, and then exposed them to images of models in magazine ads for one to three minutes. The women were then asked to evaluate themselves again, and in all cases, they reported a drop in their level of satisfaction with their own bodies. The study suggests that the majority of women would benefit from social interventions aimed at curbing the effects of the media. Unlike past interventions that have targeted specific groups of women, such as those with preexisting eating and body-image concerns, this study suggests that such attempts are important for all women.

问答题

问答题

问答题According to a report, the birth sex ratio in China is still out of proportion and could cause serious imbalance among the people in the decades ahead, with millions of men in China unable to find wives. Topic: Imbalanced birth sex ratio Questions for Reference: 1. What might the serious imbalance suggest? 2. What can the government do to remedy the situation? 3. Do you think the situation will improve in the near future?

问答题自古以来，我国各民族人民劳动、生息、繁衍在祖国的土地上，各民族组之间建立了紧密的政治经济文化联系，早在两千多年前就形成了幅员辽阔的统一国家。悠久的中华文化，成为维系民族团结和国家统一的牢固纽带。 　　我们的先人历来把独立自主作为立国之本。中国作为人类文明发祥地之一，在几千年的历史进程中，文化传统始终没有中断。近代中国虽屡遭列强欺凌，国势衰败，但经过全民族的百年抗争，又以巨人的姿态重新站立起来。

问答题中国已经明确了本世纪头20年的奋斗目标，这就是紧紧抓住重要战略机遇期，全面建设惠及十几亿人口的更高水平的小康社会，到2020年实现国内生产总值比2000年翻两番，达到4万亿美元左右，人均国内生产总值达到3000美元左右，使经济更加发展、民主更加健全、科教更加进步、文化更加繁荣、社会更加和谐、人民生活更加殷实。我们深知，中国在相当长时期内仍然是发展中国家，从中国有13亿人口的国情出发，实现这个奋斗目标是很不容易的，需要我们继续进行长期的艰苦奋斗。

问答题

问答题中华文明历来注重以民为本，尊重人的尊严和价值。早在千百年前，中国人就提出“民惟邦本，本固邦宁”、“天地之间，莫贵于人”，强调要利民、裕民、养民、惠民。今天，我们坚持以人为本，就是要坚持发展为了人民，发展依靠人民，发展成果由人民共享，关注人的价值、权益和自由，关注人的生活质量、发展潜能和幸福指数，最终是为了实现人的全面发展。保障人民的生存权和发展权仍是中国的首要任务。我们将大力推动经济社会发展，依法保障人民享有自由、民主和人权，实现社会公平和正义，使13亿中国人民过上幸福生活。

问答题 Directions: In this part of the test, you will hear 2 passages in English. You will hear the passages ONLY ONCE. After you have heard each passage, translate it into Chinese and write your version in the corresponding space in your ANSWER BOOKLET. You may take notes while you are listening.

问答题

问答题What is British government's "tradable certificate"? Introduce briefly the dilemma the certificate is now faced with.

问答题[此试题无题干]

问答题 Today in the United States and the developed world, women are better off than ever before. But the blunt truth is that men still run the world. While women continue to outpace men in educational achievement, we have ceased making real progress at the top of any industry. Women hold around 14% of Fortune 500 executive-officer positions and about 17% of board seats, numbers that have barely budged over the last decade. This means that when it comes to making the decisions that most affect our world, our voices are not heard equally. It is time for us to face the fact that our revolution has stalled. A truly equal world would be one where women ran half of our countries and companies and men ran half of our homes. The laws of economics and many studies of diversity tell us that if we tapped the entire pool of human resources and talent, our performance would improve. Throughout my career, I was told over and over about inequalities in the workplace and how hard it would be to have a career and a family. I rarely, however, heard anything about the ways I was holding myself back. From the moment they are born, boys and girls are treated differently. Women internalize the negative messages we get throughout our lives—the messages that say it's wrong to be outspoken, aggressive, more powerful than men—and pull back when we should lean in. We must not ignore the real obstacles women face in the professional world, from sexism and discrimination to a lack of flexibility, access to child care and parental leave. But women can dismantle the internal barriers holding us back today. Here is one example of how women can lean in. In 2003, Columbia Business School professor Frank Flynn and New York University professor Cameron Anderson ran an experiment. They started with a Harvard Business School case study about a real-life entrepreneur named Heidi Roizen. It described how Roizen became a successful venture capitalist by using her "outgoing personality ... and vast personal and professional network ... [which] included many of the most powerful business leaders in the technology sector". Half the students in the experiment were assigned to read Heidi's story. The other half got the same story with just one difference—the name was changed from Heidi to Howard. When students were polled, they rated Heidi and Howard as equally competent. But Howard came across as a more appealing colleague. Heidi was seen as selfish and not "the type of person you would want to hire or work for". This experiment supports what research has already clearly shown, success and likeability are positively correlated for men and negatively correlated for women. When a man is successful, he is liked by both men and women. When a woman is successful, people of both genders like her less. I believe this bias is at the very core of why women are held back. It is also at the very core of why women hold themselves back. When a woman excels at her job, both men and women will comment that she is accomplishing a lot but is "not as well liked by her peers". She is probably also "too aggressive", "not a team player", "a bit political"; she "can't be trusted" or is "difficult". Those are all things that have been said about me and almost every senior woman I know. The solution is making sure everyone is aware of the penalty women pay for success. Recently at Facebook, a manager received feedback that a woman who reported to him was "too aggressive". Before including this in her review, he decided to dig deeper. He went back to the people who gave the feedback and asked what aggressive actions she had taken. After they answered, he asked point-blank, "If a man had done those same things, would you have considered him too aggressive?" They each said no. By showing both men and women how female colleagues are held to different standards, we can start changing attitudes today.