yet这里作用同but，连接两个并列独立分句，并列结构，不是从属结构

b中where first discovered in 1932 错误，没有细心度题，排除了cde，选了b，b排出的话其实就对了，都是基本的语法错误。排除法

both and 严格平行，这里不平行。 尤其没加介词。
Jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk 这种说法也是对的
只要不平行一定排出

both and 严格平行，这里不平行。 尤其没加介词。
Jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk 这种说法也是对的

it is expected that it will increase the number of direct point-to-point flights, rather than to continue
把省略部分补全就是：
it will increase the number of direct point-to-point flights, rather than it will to continue，错误， it will increase the number of direct point-to-point flights, rather than it will continue，所以是rather than continue，不是rather than to continue
这个问题奇怪在：航线怎么会增加点对点航班的数量，应该是公司或者人增加航班数量。
The class has increased the number of students，班级增加了学生的数量。所以increase是个中动词，可以某人增加某物数量，也可以某物增加数量。

B， if it is allowed that……，it是形式主语，that的内容才是真正的主语。但allow只能是允许某人做某事，不能是允许某事的发生，所以选C，if they（the restorers） are allowed

A选项，the word's largest organization应该是修饰“MF”或“DWB”，不是修饰council，委员会不能是世界上最大的组织。两个noun modifier修饰一个名词，是不是要用and 连接呀？
I like deer, an animal in forest, which is pretty.
I like deer, an animal in forest, and an animal is gender.
I like deer, which is pretty and likes eating grass.
只能理解成：一个同位语、一个定语修饰同一个名词，不用加and。

a single tasteless and odorless drop，两组形容词修饰一个名词，然鹅并没有造成歧义，所以是可以的。

autobiographies, which remained。。。这里的which修饰有争议，不够清楚

AB: 主语的核心词是increase（增加）
DE：主语的核心词是usage（使用）、
C: if used as substitutions for more traditional fertilizers , 补上主语就是if synthetic fertilizers are used as substitutions...逻辑上来说就是 synthetic fertilizers = substituions ，逻辑错误

化肥（化肥是无辜的）本身是不会造成环境恶化，或造成土壤退化加速的，只有人【加速使用】化肥或者人【替代】传统肥料为化肥这两件事，才会导致环境恶化。类似的有一道og的题目，说fossil fuel 或 human 或 human's burning fossil fuel 这三者谁会造成空气质量变差----选最后一个。

(A) immigrants’ rates不能同other immigrant group相比.

(B) rates of entrepreneurship不能同other immigrant group相比

(C) 正确, 用those代替前面出现过的rates,比较双方对应

(D) the rates of entrepreneurship不能同other immigrant group相比

(E) 使用双重所有格,错误; 主谓不一致:主语是rates,谓语应该用exceed.

car occupants是车主，和passenger不一样的意思。

for doing 表示原因，不表示目的

虽然the novels of James Fenimore Cooper按逻辑也是属于early American literature，但nowhere in early American literature也合理。in early American literature做状语，修饰influence is more apparent in A‘s novel than in anywhere这件事情，将句子再简化就是influence is apparent in early American literature这件事情，但这个句子并不强调影响力局限在早期文学才是明显的，influence is more apparent in A‘s novel than in anywhere in early American literature更合理。

which有指代drug spending的嫌疑

The author states that chance events can lead to extinction. However, the author does not speculate on whether this is true in the case of the amphibians. It most likely is not, since the author claims that chance events can lead to extinction specifically in the case of endangered species, and does not state that the amphibians were previously endangered.

老师 我特想不明白为什么下结论不能是积累的结果呢？

别说了 我来拯救你们了
首先BC不仅错在and，而且over the past twenty years 有修饰 the brain and its development 的嫌疑
DE则错在：comma+ing VERB两种意义（转载Ron）（1）同时发生（2）unavoidable结果。本文中amass knowledge则并非得出结论的必然结果，所以不能用 ”，doing“

把D中的it actually is 改成 is actually应该就没问题了