break even 盈亏平衡 不赔钱
much less turn a profit 更不必说盈利了
因为在museum外设立stand的执照很贵==》以typical的价格要每小时卖25个才能回本儿
city hall以外设立stand==》每小时只需要卖15个就可以盈利
结论：在museum外不可能盈利
gap：人家题上说了啊，如果每小时卖够25个，在museum外开一间stand还是有可能盈利的，所以要弥补的gap就是什么原因会导致卖不够25个==》人流量小balabala

做题的时候做对了但是完全没有正确的体会到这个题的含义
Mayor：建议开垦出更多的area以供螃蟹nesting
Birdwatcher：（注意体会density密度的含义）如果crab的密度不高的话，bird会饿（言下之意不会来了）。==》（意思是在反驳mayor的提议，如果扩大了area，那么density就会下降）

The newly freed workers, seeking to become self-employed tenant farmers rather than wage laborers, made direct arrangements with merchants for supplies.

"to serve" is better than "serving", because
* "to serve" implies a sense of purpose or intention (which is precisely what is to be conveyed here), and
* "serving" implies that the systems were already serving boston at the time when they were being constructed.

错选D...虽然考虑到了样本的（不公平性），但是自己脑补了医生==》更注重健康？？？这个概念....完全没有依据...

D：the main skeleton of the sentence is "there were concerns", which is NOT the main point. in choice (a), the main skeleton is "concerns led to the construction", which IS the main point.

C错哪了啊 因为不能说服政府管理 所以都得遵守，取非→能说服就不需要遵守，哪里错了呢

A项的despite后面如果是一个独立主格结构的话，是不是可以看成its covering （of）the entire planet，XXX.因为只有covering做动名词，其逻辑主语为its（也就是Earth‘s），加上介词结构才构成省略with的独立主格。所以指代对象貌似没问题，但是少了of所以还是没法构成独立主格？求问老师能不能这么理解呢？

analogy:
humans walk on two legs. --> meaning: all humans (or at least all normal humans) walk on two legs.
there are humans that walk on two legs. --> there are at least some.
注意：there be有时候是在强调后面noun的存在性

A都没涉及这个方案啊 问的是这个方案（怪衣服）能不能达成效果 跑去说别人怎么样就有点···· - -

theoyA(concise)
From the point of the whole species，the possibility of a compact school to be found i
lower than that of dispersed individuals

有没有人觉得B里头 伴随状语也可以

~ sth (with sth)给某物充电==》引申义：充满着...
charge a battery
a voice charged with tension

charge的用法
~ sb (with sth)以某事控告某人
~ ((at) sb/sth) 进攻
~ (sb/sth) for sth要价

注意灵活的去掉插入语去理解句子的整体含义

证券公司

翻译的时候能不能上点心，或者压根别翻译。能考gmat的人这点英语都看得懂，就讲解语法知识好了

because of后面只能加名词性质的名词==》v-ing有时候是表动词性质的

其实错选B的时候也有犹豫一下。。。因为including通常是直接说某一个东西包含的全部内容 显然这里破折号后是部分内容而不是全部内容

RON：
word choice is a sticky thing. for instance, it's actually better to say "birds have a four-chambered heart" than to say "birds have four-chambered hearts", because the former makes it clear that each bird has exactly 1 heart. both, however, are acceptable.
in a similar vein, the construction of (d) and (e) makes it more clear that each book has exactly 1 author.

想問本句完整的中文翻譯會是什麼意思