问答题Questions 1～3 Toward the end of every calendar year, Ian Robertson puts his small arsenal of expensive fountain pens into overdrive. That's when Rolls-Royce Motor Cars sends a yearbook to customers who have purchased a Rolls since Jan. 1,2003, when production began under the German automaker BMW. As head of Rolls-Royce, Robertson personally signs each book's accompanying cover letter. The bespoke touch is appreciated by the company's superrich clientele—which numbered 2,800 when Robertson performed the task last year. "With that many customers," he says, "I could just about do it. " This year Robertson may need an autopen. The iconic British car company is expecting already rising sales to soar, relatively speaking. This is, after all, a company whose ambition is to sell a mere 1,000 cars a year. That's a goal within reach, thanks to upcoming expansions of the product line, increasing numbers of extremely rich potential buyers and fast-growing Asian markets. Last year Rolls sold 805 Phantoms, its main model, slightly more than the previous year. Revenues were also up—the company won't say by how much—largely because of the newly introduced extended- wheelbase Phantom, which has a base price of $403,000, or $ 63,000 more than the standard version. Garel Rhys, emeritus professor of automotive economics at Cardiff Business School in Wales, applauds the company's performance since its acquisition by BMW: "You couldn't expect much better." In July, it rolled out the Drophead Coupe, a two-door convertible Phantom starting at $ 407,000. Overall, Robertson predicts, the firm should enjoy double-digit sales growth this year. The company began life in 1904, when Charles Rolls, an aristocratic automobile aficionado and dealership owner, joined forces with fledgling carmaker Henry Royce. Then and now, the company's cars were big, powerful, stately and silent. In 1931, Roils acquired the more sporty, slightly less expensive rival Bentley. When Roll—which also made aircraft engines—went bust in 1971, the auto and aerospace units became separate companies. After a variety of owners, BMW took over. It now builds the cars at a plant in Sussex, England, operating one line and one shift that turns out four or five hand-built cars a day. The 550 employees include craftsmen—skilled cabinet—and saddle makers, for example. Most Rolls are made to order; on average, customers pay $ 20,000 to have their car customized. The company is adding a second line next year and a second shift in 2009 to handle (at the same careful pace) both the Drophead and other planned new cars. For its first Rolls, BMW opted to resurrect the Phantom—a big sedan limousine that all but begs to be chauffeur-driven. That meant targeting the very rich, whose legions are growing fast. Rolls wants to increase its market share while still remaining at the price pinnacle. Next year it's introducing a hardtop coupe version of the Phantom and launching a smaller, as-yet-unnamed sedan. So who is willing to pay a small ransom to own a Roller? Buyers tend to be entrepreneurs, show-business celebrities or sports stars; few are corporate executives. One factor working for Rolls in developing economies: showing off one's megabucks is culturally acceptable in China. That helps explain why China is now Rolls' third largest and fastest-growing market, accounting for 10% of sales. (The U.S. still accounts for 45%.) It was a Beijing property developer who last year paid a record $ 2.3 million for a superstretch Phantom. BMW will certainly be happy to see Rolls generating profits, given the $1.2 billion Rhys estimates it put into the company. Rolls won't budge Beemer's bottom line, given the parent Company's $ 65 billion in sales. But owning Rolls-Royce gives BMW prestige and bragging rights. It proves it can sell cars that sweep the breadth of the market, from budget to budget-busting. Should the world's economy sputter and car sales drop off a cliff, "Rolls-Royce would probably be the first thing to go," Rhys says. But for now, like that iconic spirit of ecstasy that makes up its hood ornament, Rolls-Royce looks poised to speed ahead.1.What can we learn from Ian Robertson's experience at the beginning of the passage?

问答题For a company that looked doomed a decade ago, it has been quite a comeback. Today Apple is literally an iconic company. Some of the power of its brand comes from the extraordinary story of a computer company rescued from near-collapse by its co-founder, Steve Jobs, who returned to Apple in 1997 after years of exile, reinvented it as a consumer-electronics firm and is now taking it into the billion-unit-a-year mobile-phone industry. But mostly Apple's zest comes from its reputation for inventiveness. From its first computer in 1977 to the iPhone now, which goes on sale in America this month, Apple has prospered by keeping just ahead of the times. The company, however, is not without its critics. The firm has come under attack for refusing to make its operating-system and music-protection software available to others (a price worth paying, Apple responds, for greater reliability and consistency). And there are grumbles about manufacturing defects and customer service. Apple is hardly alone in the high-tech industry when it comes to duff gadgets and unhelpful call centers, but in other respects it is highly unusual. In particular, it inspires an almost religious fervor among its customers. That is no doubt helped by the fact that its corporate biography is so closely bound up with the mercurial Mr. Jobs, a rare showman in his industry.

问答题Disparaging comments by adults about a children's presenter have led to an angry backlash in support of Cerrie Burnell, the 29-year-old CBeebies host who was born missing the lower section of her right arm. One man said that he would stop his daughter from watching the BBC children's channel because Burnell would give his child nightmares. Parents even called the broadcaster to complain after Burnell, with Alex Winters, took over the ehannel's popular Do and Discover slot and The Bedtime Hour programme last month, to complain about her disability. And some of the vitriolic comments on the "Grown Up" section of the channel' s website were so nasty that they had to be removed. "Is it just me, or does anyone else think the new woman presenter on CBeebies may scare the kids because of her disability?" wrote one adult on the CBeebies website. Other adults claimed that their children were asking difficult questions as a result. "I didn't want to let my children watch the filler bits on The Bedtime Hour last night because I know it would have played on my eldest daughter's mind and possibly caused sleep problems," said one message. The BBC received nine other complaints by phone. While charities reacted angrily to the criticism of the children's presenter, calling the comments disturbing, other parents and carers labeled the remarks as disgraceful, writing in support of Burnell and setting up a "fight disability prejudice" page on the social networking site Facebook. "I think that it is great that Cerrie is on CBeebies. She is an inspiration to children and we should not underestimate their ability to understand and accept that all of us have differences-some visible and some not," wrote "Surfergirlboosmum". Other websites were flooded with equally supportive comments. "I feel we should all post counter complaints to the BBC and I'm sure they will receive more complaints about the fact they have even considered accepting these complaints," wrote Scott Tostevin on Facebook. "It's a disgrace that people still have snch negative views against people who are 'different'”, he added. Burnell, who described her first television presenting role as a "dream job", has also appeared in EastEnders and Holby City and has been feted for performances in the theatre while also worked as a teaching assistant at a special needs school in London. She also has a four-year-old child. "I think the negative comments from those few parents are indicative of a wider problem of disabled representation in the media as a whole, which is why it's so important for there to be more disabled role models in every area of the media," she said in response yesterday. "The support that I've received ... has been truly heartening. It's brilliant that parents are able to use me as a way of talking about disability with their children and for children who are similarly disabled to see what really is possible in life and for their worlds to be represented in such a positive, high profile manner. " Charities said that much still needed to be done to change perceptions in society. "In some way it is a pretty sad commentary on the way society is now and that both parents and children see few examples of disabled people. The sooner children are exposed to disability in mainstream education the better," said Mark Shrimpton at Radar, the UK's largest disability campaigning organisation. "She is a role model for other disabled people. " Rosemary Bolinger, a trustee at Scope, a charity for people with cerebral palsy, said: "It is disturbing that some parents have reacted in this way ... Unfortunately disabled people are generally invisible in the media and wider society. /1.Who is Cerrie Burnell? Give a brief introduction of Cerrie Burnell.

问答题人生能有几回搏!生命有限，竞技生命更是短暂的。运动员比任何人更深刻地认识到时光易逝机会难得。他会珍惜并利用每一分钟，抓住任何一个机会。他付出许多，也得到许多，不仅为自己，也为祖国赢得荣誉。 参与并取胜，这就是奥林匹克精神。它表现在弱者敢于向强者挑战，也表现在强者力争取得更好的成绩。胜而又胜，优而更优，这种理想一直鼓舞着运动员奋力前进。他会尽其所能，永不松懈，永不罢休。有人说竞技者终究会是失败者，即使是最佳运动员也终将被更强者淘汰。成千上万个强者才涌现一个胜利者，这个胜利者最终仍将被取代，挤出光荣榜——这就是竞技运动的规律。

问答题 Questions 7～10 It is with a queasy feeling that the world's bankers enter 2008. Within 12 months, they have seen record profits crumble, once-booming debt businesses blighted by write—owns, and the troubles of some former high-flyers in the mortgage industry threaten the soundness of the financial system. Fresh obstacles loom in 2008, including a new regulatory regime, known as Basel 2, whose shortcomings have emerged even before it has been officially born. More worrying still would be a slowdown in the world economy. That is not all. The maelstrom in credit markets in 2007 exposed flaws in a banking model that has transformed the finance industry: the banks' ability to sell loans that they don't want to keep to investors hungry for high-yielding assets. This "U-Haul" model of distributed risk had been widely considered one of the marvels of modern finance, until trouble hit. The ability of American banks to turn their loans, via Wall Street's alchemists, into packages of high-yielding securities and sell them to investors was supposed to have enabled banks to diversify their exposure to credit risk. Bank failures had for years been minimal, even during the Asian and Russian debt crises of 1997 and 1998 and the dotcom collapse. By keeping fewer loans on their balance sheets, banks reported stronger returns on their assets, helping to generate bumper earnings. The coming year will test how much of that risk has indeed been spread, and how much of the diversification was illusory. Did banks simply replace the risk of lending on their own doorstep with exposures from outside their sphere of expertise? Some lenders appear to have bamboozled naive borrowers into taking on mortgages they couldn't afford, knowing they could sell the unsound loans into the market with few questions asked. Others made themselves vulnerable by financing long- term loans in the short-term money markets, rather than from depositors or through issuance of bonds. They were strangled when the money markets seized up. Taking such risks will be far harder in 2008, because everyone has been sharply reminded of the maturity mismatch between assets and liabilities that is at the heart of banking. So banks will have to court depositors, not the capital markets. When they make loans, they will have to keep them, monitor them and ensure repayment, rather than passing them on like hot potatoes. "There will be a mad rush back to traditional banking," predicts Dick Bove, banking analyst at Punk Ziegel. The process will not be smooth. Politicians, especially in the American Congress, may tie up lenders with red tape. And Basel 2, with its new capital-adequacy framework for banks, will be roiled out across the European Union from January (it will affect some American banks in 2009). At least for less sophisticated banks, it leans heavily on rating agencies as arbiters of credit quality. But their credibility has been damaged by the over-optimistic assessments they made of some of the riskier debt instruments. Basel 2 also focuses on credit risk, and largely skates over the fickleness of liquidity that bedevilled markets in 2007. It has been a long time since banks have faced such torments, but their business has always been a cyclical one and only the foolish will have forgotten that. (As the saying goes, a banker is someone who lends you an umbrella when it is sunny, and asks for it back when it rains.) To tide them over, all those profits have left banks with plenty of capital in the vaults. Should that run out, central bankers in America and Europe have also shown a remarkable willingness to provide liquidity to the financial system to prevent panic. Tougher conditions are also reducing competition from non-bank financial players, which had flourished in the easy-money era. Aggressive mortgage banks, such as Countrywide in America and Northern Rock in Britain, have revealed their frailties. The big American banks—such as Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase—have retail-banking franchises that may expand by acquiring stricken competitors. The same holds true for well-capitalised retail banks in Europe. Investment banks that falter may find nationwide American banks offering to buy them; or European banks such as Italy's UniCredit taking audacious advantage of their hour of need. Lurking in the background is another potential source of support, deep-pocketed governments in China and the Middle East, keen to invest part of their wealth in Western banks' assets and expertise. According to Morgan Stanley, sovereign-wealth funds spent $ 26 billion in the six months to October 2007 on big financial firms such as Barclays, a British bank, Blackstone, a private-equity group, and the London Stock Exchange. Banks, for their part, covet access to big emerging markets, and a strategic stake sold to the Chinese government, say, may ease the way to a strategic stake in a Chinese bank. But government ownership of banks is always tricky. That should not be forgotten just because an injection of yuan, roubles or petrodollars might provide a quick and easy way to keep a bad bank on life support.

问答题So many of the productions currently to be seen on the London stage are concerned with the more violent aspects of life that it is surprising to meet a play about ordinary people caught up in ordinary events. Thomas Sackville's The Visitor is just such a play--at least, on the surface. It seems to stand well outside the mainstream of recent British drama. In fact the surface is so bland that attention is constantly focused on the care with which the play has been put together, and the clarity with which its argument develops; it seems natural to discuss it in terms of the notion of "the well-wrought play". The story is about an unremarkable family evening in middle-class suburbia. The husband and wife have invited a friend to dinner. The friend turns up in due course and they talk about their respective lives and interests. During this conversation, in which the author shows a remarkable talent for writing dialogue which is entertaining and witty without being so sparkling as to draw too much attention to itself; the characters are carefully fleshed out and provided with a set of credible--if unremarkable--motives. Through innumerable delicate touches in the writing they emerge. pleasant, humorous, ordinary, and ineffectual. And if they are never made vibrantly alive in terms of the real world, one feels that this is deliberate; that the author is content to give them a the atricalexistence of their own, and leave it at that.

问答题近几年掀起的“公务员热”使国家公务员考试成为中国竞争最激烈的考试之一。自1995年国家公务员考试推行以来，报考公务员日渐升温，这两年更是热得发烫。《中国青年报》和腾讯网联合开展的一项最新在线调查显示，73%以上的年轻人愿意当公务员。在17330名调查对象中，约83%的人说，他们主要看重公务员工作稳定、医疗和养老都有保障。此外，55%的人说，当公务员能获得“切实利益”。国家公务员之所以如此有诱惑力，不仅是因为收入稳定、医疗有保障，风险小、权力大、实惠多也是其中的重要原因。

问答题

问答题Thirty years ago this week, an American President arrived in China on a trip designed to end decades of estrangement and confront centuries of suspicion. President Richard Nixon showed the world that two vastly different governments could meet on the grounds of common interest, and in a spirit of mutual respect. During the 30 years since, America and China have exchanged many handshakes of friendship and commerce. And as we have had more contact with each other, the citizens of our two countries have gradually learned more about each other. Once, America knew China only by its history as a great and enduring civilization. Today, we see a China that is still defined by noble traditions of family, scholarship, and honor. And we see a China that is becoming one of the most dynamic and creative societies in the world as demonstrated by all the knowledge and potential right here in this room. China is on a rising path, and America welcomes the emergence of a strong, peaceful, and prosperous China.

问答题News Report: Xu Ting could not believe his luck when he discovered the generous ATM in Guangzhou in April 2006. For every 1,000 yuan the migrant worker withdrew from the machine, he noticed that his bank account was only debited by I yuan. It was discovered that in nearly eight months Xu withdrew 175,000 yuan in 171 transactions through this malfunctioning ATM. He was arrested a year later, charged and sentenced to life imprisonment for larceny. The judgment, however, has sparked an outcry from the public. Topic: Should taking advantage of a malfunctioning ATM warrant a life sentence? Questions for Reference: 1. Do you think that life sentence is unfair and far too harsh? Why or why not? 2. Do you think what Xu Ting did is a crime of theft? You can explain either from the viewpoint of a specialist or that of a layperson. 3. What will you do if you face such a malfunctioning ATM?

问答题 Last week's news that scientists had cloned a sheep sent academics and the public into a panic at the prospect that humans might be next. That's an understandable reaction. Cloning is a radical challenge to the most fundamental laws of biology, so it's not unreasonable to be concerned that it might threaten human society and dignity. Yet much of the ethical opposition seems also to grow out of an unthinking disgust—a sort of "yuk factor. " And that makes it hard for even trained scientist sand ethicists to see the matter clearly. While human cloning might not offer great benefits to humanity, no one has yet made a persuasive case that it would do any real harm, either. Theologians contend that to clone a human would violate human dignity. That would surely be true if a cloned individual were treated as a lesser being, with fewer rights or lower stature. But why suppose that cloned person wouldn't share the same rights and dignity as the rest of us? A leading lawyer-ethicist has suggested that cloning would violate the "right to genetic identity." Where did he come up with such a right? It makes perfect sense to say that adult persons have a right not to be cloned without their voluntary, informed consent. But if such consent is given, whose "right" to genetic identity would be violated? Many of the science-fiction scenarios prompted by the prospect of human cloning turn out, upon reflection, to be absurdly improbable. There's the fear, for instance, that parents might clone a child to have "spare parts" in case the original child needs an organ transplant. But parents of identical twins don't view one child as an organ farm for the other. Why should cloned children's parents be any different? Another disturbing thought is that cloning will lead to efforts to breed individuals with genetic qualities perceived as exceptional (math geniuses, basketball players). Such ideas are repulsive, not only because of the "yuk factor" but also because of the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis in the name of eugenics. But there's a vast difference between "selective breeding" as practiced by totalitarian regimes (where the urge to propagate certain types of people leads to efforts to eradicate other types) and the immeasurably more benign forms already practiced in democratic societies (where, say, lawyers freely choose to marry other lawyers ). Banks stocked with the frozen sperm of geniuses already exist. They haven't created a master race because only a tiny number of women have wanted to impregnate themselves this way. Why think it will be different if human cloning becomes available? So who will likely take advantage of cloning? Perhaps a grieving couple whose child is dying. This might seem psychologically twisted. But a cloned child born to such dubious parents stands no greater or lesser chance of being loved, or rejected, or warped than a child normally conceived. Infertile couples are also likely to seek out cloning. That such couples have other options (in vitro fertilization or adoption) is not an argument for denying them the right to clone. Or consider an example raised by Judge Richard Posner: a couple in which the husband has some tragic genetic defect. Currently, if this couple wants a genetically related child, they have four not altogether pleasant options. They can reproduce naturally and risk passing on the disease to the child. They can go to a sperm bank and take a chance on unknown genes. They can try in vitro fertilization and dispose of any afflicted embryo—though that might be objectionable, too. Or they can get a male relative of the father to donate sperm, if such a relative exists. This is one case where even people unnerved by cloning might see it as not the worst option. Even if human cloning offers no obvious benefits to humanity, why ban it? In a democratic society we don't usually pass laws outlawing something before there is actual or probable evidence of harm. A moratorium on further research into human cloning might make sense, in order to consider calmly the grave question it raises. If the moratorium is then lifted, human cloning should remain a research activity for an extended period. And if it is ever attempted, it should — and no doubt will — take place only with careful scrutiny and layers of legal oversight. Most important, human cloning should be governed by the same laws that now protect human rights. A world not safe for cloned humans would be a world not safe for the rest of us.

问答题The Difficulty of Translation Since translating is a skill which requires considerable practice, most people assume that it can be taught, and to some extent this is true. But it is also true that really exceptional translators are born, not made. Potential translators must have a high level of aptitude for the creative use of language, or they are not likely to be outstanding in their profession. Perhaps the greatest benefit from instruction in translating is to become aware of one"s own limitations, something which a translator of Steinbeck"s of Mice and Men into Chinese should have learned. Then he would not have translated English mule-skinner into a Chinese phrase meaning "a person who skins the hide of a mule". For many people the need for human translation seems paradoxical in this age of computers. Some modern computers can be loaded with dictionaries and grammars, why not let computers do the work? Computers can perform certain very simple interlingual tasks, providing there is sufficient pre-editing and post-editing. But neither advertising brochures nor lyric poetry can ever been reduced to the kind of logic required of computer programs. Computer printouts of translations can often be understood, if the persons involved already know what the text is supposed to say. But the results of machine translating are usually in an unnatural form of language and sometimes just plain weird. Furthermore, real improvements will not come from merely doctoring the program or adding rules. The human brain is not only digital and analogic, but it also has a built-in system of values which gives it a componentially incalculable advantage over machines. Human translators will always be necessary for any text that is stylistically appealing and semantically complex—which includes most of what is worth communicating in another language. The most difficult texts to translate are not, however, highly literary productions, but rather those texts which say nothing, the type of language often used by politicians and delegates to international forums. In fact, a group of professional translators at the United Nations headquarters in New York City have insisted that the most difficult text to translate is one in which the speaker or writer has attempted to say nothing. The next most difficult type of text is one filled with irony and sarcasm, since in a written text the paralinguistic clues to the meaning are usually much more difficult to detect than when someone is speaking. And perhaps the third most difficult type of text is a book or article on translating in which the illustrative examples rarely match. Some people imagine that the greatest problem in translating is to find the right words and constructions in the receptor or target language. On the contrary, the most difficult task for the translator is to understand thoroughly the designative and associative meanings of the text to be translated. This involves not only knowing the meanings of the words and the syntactic relations, but also being sensitive to all the nuances of the stylist device. As one struggling translator summed up his problem, "if I really understood what the text means, I could easily translate it."

问答题Dell says the problem is that it dropped prices too much. But deeper, more threatening forces are also now at play. The first is the resurgence of rivals, which have caught up with Dell"s low price model. By driving prices down, Dell has unintentionally cut costs for its rivals too. "The supply chain has become as standardized as the components—the money has been wrung out," explains an expert. Dell, by not working through retail outlets, is still more efficient, but the cost benefits that this once brought have been whittled away. The second factor hurting Dell is that growth in the computer business is coming from the consumer market and emerging countries rather than the corporate market, in which Dell sells around 85% of its machines. Increasing sales to consumers is difficult for Dell because individuals tend to want to see and touch computers before buying them. They also like to be able to return the machine easily if it breaks. Dell"s tack of retail presence, once ballyhooed as a benefit, has turned into grave disadvantage. A third problem facing Dell is its exclusive use of Intel chips rather than lower-priced ones made by Intel"s sworn rivals, AMD. This arrangement lets Dell buy chips inexpensively and benefit from Intel"s generous co-marketing programmes. But it has started to harm Dell"s sales for higher margin computer servers.

问答题Today our lives are changing faster than at any time in history. Here we report on two important changes that will have a big impact on our everyday lives in the future. The cashless society Cash and bank-notes will disappear almost completely. They will be replaced by smart cards—plastic cards with microchip processors "loaded" with some money. When we pay for goods, the retailer will insert our smart card into a payment terminal and money will be transferred from our card to the retailer's card. When all the money is used up, we will be able to "reload" it by inserting it into a telephone, dialing our bank account and transferring money to the card from the account. If we want to transfer money from our card to a bank account, we will use the same method. Smart cards will be able to hold several different currencies at the same time, so if we go aboard, we will use our smart cards in the same way. Interactive telephone Human telephone operators will be sharply replaced by talking computers. These computers will recognize speech, ask us what information we need, access the information from a database, and convert it to speech. If we want to book a flight or pay a bill by phone, we will interact with a talking computer to do so. Of course, this won't happen until all the technology is in place, but when it is we will soon get used to interacting with computers in this way. Human telephone operators will be used only for more complex operations such as dealing with complaints or solving concrete problems.

问答题[此试题无题干]

问答题Chinese orphanages are filled with perfectly wonderful infants and toddling Chinese girls abandoned by their parents. However, many of the Chinese infertile couples are unwilling to adopt orphans. Topic: Shall we encourage more people to adopt? Questions for Reference: 1. What do you think are good reasons for people to adopt orphans? 2. Why doesn"t an infertile couple usually want to adopt a child from the orphanage? 3. There are so many abandoned children in the orphanages. What shall we do to solve this problem?

问答题 Directions: In this part of the test, you will hear 2 English passages. 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.

问答题伟大的抗战精神，蕴含着中华儿女和衷共济的团结精神。面对亡国灭种的民族危机，中华儿女，地无分南北，人无分老幼，有钱出钱，有力出力，举国上下，万众一心，用血肉筑成了一座侵略者不可逾越的新的长城。“富贵不能淫，贫贱不能移，威武不能屈”，在民族患难的时代，这种浩然之气概，不屈之节操，激励着中华儿女赴汤蹈火，殊死奋战，使救亡图存成为可歌可泣、英勇卓绝的斗争。今年是中国人民抗日战争暨世界反法西斯战争胜利60周年。重温那段血与火的悲壮历史，缅怀抗日先烈的丰功伟绩，弘扬中华民族伟大的抗战精神，在今天仍然具有十分重要的意义。

问答题我们要创造更加良好的政治环境和更加自由的学术氛围，让人民追求真理、崇尚理性、尊重科学，探索自然的奥秘、社会的法则和人生的真谛。正因为有了充分的学术自由，像牛顿这样伟大的科学家，才能够思潮奔腾、才华迸发，敢于思考前人从未思考过的问题，敢于踏进前人从未涉足的领域。 我们历来主张尊重世界文明的多样性，倡导不同文明之间的对话、交流与合作。我国已故著名社会学家费孝通先生，上世纪30年代曾在英国留学并获得博士学位，一生饱经沧桑。他在晚年提出：“各美其美，美人之美，美美与共，世界大同。”费老先生的这一人生感悟，生动反映了当代中国人开放包容的胸怀。

问答题Answer: A proposal to change long-standing federal policy and deny citizenship to babies born to illegal immigrants on U.S. soil ran aground this month in Congress, but it is sure to resurface—kindling bitter debate even if it fails to become law. 　　At issue is “birthright citizenship”—provided for since the Constitution’s 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868. Section 1 of that amendment, drafted with freed slaves in mind, says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” 　　Some conservatives in Congress, as well as advocacy groups seeking to crack down on illegal immigration, say the amendment has been misapplied over the years, that it was never intended to grant citizenship automatically to babies of illegal immigrants. Thus they contend that federal legislation, rather than a difficult-to-achieve constitutional amendment, would be sufficient to end birthright citizenship. 　　“Most Americans feel it doesn’t make any sense for people to come into the country illegally, give birth and have a new U.S. citizen,” said the spokesman of the federation of American immigration reform. “But the advocates for illegal immigrants will make a fuss; they’ll claim you’re punishing the children, and I suspect the leadership doesn’t want to deal with that.”