翻译数据库中英对照：2020年2月24日外交部发言人赵立坚主持例行记者会 [6]
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian's Regular Press Conference on February 24, 2020 [6]
答关于这个问题我已经说得很清楚了，我想我没有必要再重复一遍。
A I don't think I'm going to repeat what I just said since it couldn't be clearer.
问首先祝贺你主持首场外交部例行记者会。我来中国仅5年，对中国的了解显然不如你这位资深外交官多。但我知道，中国是一个有着民族自豪感、强大的国家。中国不断战胜挑战，相信在抗击新冠肺炎疫情中也是如此。中国这么强大的一个国家，为什么会吊销这3位记者的证件？他们和很多中外记者一样，努力用正确的方式进行报道。中方这样做，是希望向包括美国、澳大利亚和欧洲在内的媒体发出什么样的信号呢？
Q Congratulations on your first press conference. I've only been here for about five years and obviously don't have the China experience you have with all your years here with the foreign ministry. I've got to know China as a very proud and powerful nation that has overcome a lot of challenges and hopefully also that's the case for the current coronavirus that China is battling with many other countries. Why does a country that has grown so strong need to be revoking the press credentials of these three individual WSJ journalists? Why specifically these three journalists considering they, just like many foreign and Chinese journalists in this country, try to tell stories in the right way? What is the signal that you are trying to send to newsrooms around the globe, including in Australia, the US and Europe?
答我已经多次回答这个问题。难道《华尔街日报》有张口辱骂别人的自由，被辱骂者就没有还击的权利吗？我想《华尔街日报》只是极端的个例。在座的各位记者朋友只要客观、公正报道中国，我们会一如既往地向大家提供便利。这里没有其他的解读。我希望大家能够明白，这完全是《华尔街日报》发表辱华文章应该承担的后果。
A I already responded to this question repeatedly. If the WSJ has the freedom to insult, don't the offended have the right to fight back? I think the WSJ case is just an extreme example. As long as you report China objectively and fairly, we will facilitate your work as always. There is no other way to interpret our intention. I hope you understand this is the consequence that the WSJ has to bear for publishing such an insulting article.
问中方上周表示依法依规处理外国记者事务，具体是指什么？这3名记者具体违反了哪条法规？
Q Last week the decision was explained that China deals with affairs related to foreign journalists in accordance with laws and regulations. What law or regulation did the three WSJ reporters break?
答我们根据国务院第537号令管理外国记者事务，你可以在网上查阅。
A We manage affairs related to foreign correspondents in accordance with Decree of the State Council of the People's Republic of China No. 537. You may refer to it online.
问第一个问题，美国佛蒙特州参议员桑德斯日前接受采访时表示，如他当选美国总统，将不会坐视中国对台湾动武。中方对此有何评论？第二个问题，你刚才说，只要外国记者客观报道中国，中方将继续提供便利。那么记者所属媒体如果遇到与《华尔街日报》同样的问题，记者应该如何保护自己？
Q First question, recently Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said in an interview that if he becomes president of the US, he would not sit by and allow invasions to take place if China takes military action against Taiwan. Do you have any comment on this? Second question, you said that as long as we reporters do objective coverage, the foreign ministry will continue to support our work. My question is, what then can individual reporters do to protect themselves against the action of other parts of their publication that are not related to them, as in the case of the three WSJ reporters?
答关于你提到的第一个问题，我们注意到有关报道。台湾问题纯属中国内政，任何外国无权干涉。我们敦促美国有关人士恪守一个中国原则和中美三个联合公报规定，慎重妥善处理涉台问题，以免严重损害中美关系和台海和平稳定。
A To answer your first question, we noted relevant reports. The Taiwan question is purely China's internal affairs and no foreign country has the right to interfere. We urge the US to abide by the one-China principle and the three China-US joint communiques and prudently handle issues relating to Taiwan so as to avoid causing harm to China-US relations and peace and stability across the strait.
关于第二个问题，我想你不应该屡次在这纠缠外交部发言人，而应该去问问《华尔街日报》，为什么不公开道歉？谁为辱华文章负责？
Regarding your second question, instead of pestering the foreign ministry spokesperson, you should ask WSJ why it hasn't made public apologies and who should be responsible for the insulting article.
问武汉刚刚撤回了关于解除部分交通限制的通告。你能否介绍更多情况？
Q Can you tell me more about why the announcement that Wuhan will ease its lock-down has been retracted again?
答请你向武汉方面询问。
A I refer you to the authorities in Wuhan.
注：为确保中英对照准确，“热词译”网站可能对中英文重新分段。