教师试做时间出题教师取题时间审核教研室主任出题单位使用班级考试日期考试成绩期望值印刷份数规定完成时间交教学部印刷日期学号；姓名：班级：. 密. 封. 线. 专业年级班20 20 学年第学期英语报刊宣读课试卷试卷类型：卷题号一二三四五六七八九十总成绩得分I(The Asian Wall Street Journal, Mar., 1999)（每小题5 分，共 50 分）Such is the special relationship between America and its NATO partners that while that alliance cooperates to bomb Serbian forces, the U.S. and the EU are managing a trade war against each other. Fortunately, no lives are at stake in the latter conflict. Yet if it spreads unchecked, the rest of the world is sure to feel the pain of it. It s hard to decide whether the U.S. or Europe deserves the most contempt for expanding their trade war. The first fight, over bananas, is essentially a struggle between two fruit distributors with strong political connections. Now Washington and Brussels are escalating their battle over beef, with European farmers stooping to phony science in their claims that hormone-treated American beef is unsafe. In his first term in office, President Bill Clinton teamed up with the Republicans to push major free-trade liberalizations. Now, however, he seems bent on pursuing level even if playing fields, torpedoing the world economy. The latest salvo was fired this week, with the U.S. announcing it has targeted close to $1 billion of European products for 100% tariffs if the European Union doesn t drop the hormone nonsense. The move follows an earlier announcement that the U.S. administration will fight Europe s banana import regime by hitting a range of European goods with prohibitive tariffs. Add to this renewed American threats to raise the drawbridge to Russian, Japanese and Brazilian steel, as well as administration support for a congressional vote to ban Concorde flights from Europe in relation for EU threats to refuse landing rights to old-American planes retrofitted with noise reducing technology. Mr. Clinton sounded the protectionist battle cry in his January State of the Union address, where he vowed to fight for a freer and fairer trading system for 21st century America. In the case of agriculture, when the respective lobbies on both sides of the Atlantic enter the fray, that translates into a sticky situation. On the whole, American farmers are major exporters. And U.S. farmers have a good case on beef hormones. But it is nonetheless dangerous for the U.S. to shut off $1 billion in trade. This is not to excuse the EU. The hormone argument is nonsense. The World Trade Organization has acknowledged as much, ordering the EU to allow imports of American meat by May 13. Brussels has responded by saying that it needs more time because European citizens, who supposedly don t like hormones in their food, would rebel against their governments if American meat suddenly appeared on their store shelves. Were it not for the high stakes involved for both producers and consumers, the argument might be amusing. When governments curtail trade the global economy shrinks and for all the jobs saved by protections, there are a lot more lost. The Smoot-Hawley agricultural protections imposed by the U.S. Congress in the late 1920s certainly contributed to the Great Depression. Mr. Clinton may believe he is fighting the good fight. But we ve never thought much of the kind of war where you pose even when you win. Judge whether the following statement are True or False:1. ( ) The Trade war between the U.S. and the EU has cost no lives but is equally dangerous. 2. ( ) It s very easy to decide who is to blame for expanding the trade war. 3. ( ) The very beginning of the trade war suggests that it bears political significance. 4. ( ) The author agrees that hormone-treated beef is harmful to one s health. 5. ( ) President Bill Clinton used to be a believer of free trade, but not now. 6. ( ) Level playing fields ca do good to the world economy. 7. ( ) Besides its trade war with the EU, the U.S. is also in conflict with Japan, Russia and Brazil. 8 .( ) The author thinks that in the case of beef, the American farmers are justified. 9. ( ) The author thinks that it is a right decision for the U.S. to shut off $1 billion in trade. 10. ( ) The two sides have submitted the case of beef to the WTO for settlement. II. Translate the following into Chinese: (50%)How to negotiate The US is an attractive market. Its business culture, which has brought the world “ shareholder value ” and “ IPOs” , has been leading commercial thinking in recent years and will continue to do so. But whoever wants to succeed in the US needs to remember the rules of the game. US business is described by the lyrics of the song New York, New York: “ If you can make it here, you can make it anywhere!” Yet a euphoric approach to business is by no means enough. Although business communication in the US is pleasant and easygoing, it is at the same time ruthlessly focused. Communicating is natural talent of Americans. When negotiating partners meet, the emphasis is on small talk and smiling. There is liberal use of a sense of humour that is more direct than it is i