A. that (scientists hope) will enable them to understand how the solar system formed some four billion years ago嵌入式关系分句
B. scientists are hoping to enable them错误
CE. 原文意思应该是这些measurements使科学家能......而不是科学家自己就be able to......
D. and which错误

Since 1980, productivity improvements in manufacturing have moved the United States from a position of acute decline in manufacturing to one of world prominence.
说明pre-1980是acute decline，故A选项正确

A是strengthen
E选项意思是高利率会同样延缓制造业和服务业，这样就无法解释差异

Typically, the structure "make it easy" or "make it easier" is followed by an infinitive, perhaps an infinitive with the subject of the infinitive in a "for" prepositional phrase.
. . . make it easy for passengers to get in and out . . .
Choice (A) would be correct if it didn't have the "and" at the beginning messing up the parallelism.

What's subtle and funny about (D) is that it almost feels as if there's a missing infinitive . . .
. . . make it easier for passengers to do something? when getting in and out . . .
Because the infinitive is so often used, and so often follows a "for" preposition, having something else makes the sentence feel as if an infinitive should be there somehow.

Also, the construction of (D) is technically illogical--it's a colloquial construction that native speakers use frequently in informal conversation, but it doesn't withstand logical analysis. Here's the correct construction again:
. . . make it easy for passengers to get in and out . . .
What is made easier? The act of getting in and out. The "dummy it" refers to the infinitive. That make sense.
Now, (D).
. . . make it easier for passengers when getting in and out . . .
What is made easier? The "dummy it" appears to refer to the subordinate clause beginning with "when." The "when" clause denotes a time. How is time itself "made easier?" Yes, yes, colloquial, people say stuff of this sort all the time ("she made lunchtime easier," "our end-of-year shopping package makes your holidays easier") It's colloquial and technically illogical. What is meant is that we something easier for someone at that time--we didn't make it easier for the time itself.

All of those are problems with (D).

Ron：
I don't know the terms "restrictive" and "non-restrictive", so I'll just give you a bunch of examples.
In general, the idea is this: Modifiers blocked off by commas don't narrow down possibilities; they just give additional descriptive information. Modifiers not blocked off by commas generally do narrow down possibilities.

--

John, running to catch the bus, slipped on the icy pavement and fell.
--> It would be nonsense to take away the commas, because "John" -- who is just one person -- is impossible to narrow down.
--> "Running to catch the bus" describes John.
--> Importantly, "running to catch the bus" is related to the action of the sentence. (John was running when he slipped and fell.)

--

If this kind of relationship doesn't exist, the __ing modifier is inappropriate.

*Jesse, standing almost eight inches taller than me, is my brother.
--> Nonsense, because a height difference has no relationship to the fact that we are brothers.

--

"Which"/"who"/"whom"/"whose" implies no such relationship.

Jesse, who stands almost eight inches taller than me, is my brother.
--> This sentence is fine.


Looking at the examples above -- especially the first two -- you should be able to tell what's wrong with "carrying...". The biggest problem is the complete lack of any relationship between this capacity and the other ideas that follow (gas mileage, smooth ride, etc.)

remember that parallelism is really of 2 types: GRAMMATICAL and LOGICAL.

in your case, v1 though v5 all happen to be in the same tense - present tense, because we're talking about unchanging features of minivans - but ONLY v2 through v5 are LOGICALLY parallel.
v1 describes the van's passenger seating capacity, which is NOT presented as a point of superiority over sport utility vehicles, while v2 through v5 specifically describe advantages of minivans over sport utility vehicles.
therefore, the sentence is written with v2 through v5 in list form, but, because v1 isn't in the same category as those others, it's (rightfully) excluded from that list.

that/which可以修饰就近的“名词”，也可以跨越修饰“名词+介宾短语”，
按照意思，是devastation and enslavement杀死了大批的native people，不是progress

在A is as adj. as B这个结构里，最要紧的是第二个as
第二个as的出现就表明了，你是在对比两件事物，那就必须保证这个A和B是可比的，是同种的
The book is not as good to read. 这个as就是为了强调good的程度，而to read是我要说的动作。
而The book is not as good as that one. 第一个as还是为了强调good的程度，而第二个as就表明我是在比较两个东西。
那具体到The soil is not as hard as to make it difficult to burrow....
这个第二个as的出现，明显就应该表明我是要比较两个东西了，可是"to make it difficult to burrow",暂且不管它是不是名词结构，它和那个soil都不是一个概念，不可比。这个才是最最主要的错误点~
D选项as...as比较前后两个事物，但后面是to do，非名词，故错误

B选项 recovered by archaeologists in 1982 为什么不能做前一句Henry ship Mary Rose sank in 1545 的伴随状语呢？这样的话recovered的主语不就是船了吗？

感觉C是正确的， which boosts consumption是非限定性定语从句，高中就学过非限 which可以指代从句或者整个主句，在这里指代it will stimulate demand by increasing supply and lowering prices 这个句子, 在逻辑和语意和语法上都对。
感觉A 是错的， improved efficiency in converting harvested trees into wood products 是指在做..采伐树木转化为木制品...事过程中提高效率 ，限制缩小了范围，感觉和降低harvest rates 构不成逻辑关系。
A 里的 用of doing 表示 做..采伐树木转化为木制品..的效率提高， 降低harvest rates 语意是对的。
谁能解释一下C 的理解哪里错了？

number/numbers: 表示某物的数量，可以说the number of sth，也可以说number/numbers。如： Los Angeles has a higher number of family dwellings per capita than does any other large city. 这里用number不用numbers，因为每户的住房面积是一个数字而不是很多歌数字。 Upset by the recent downturn in production numbers during the first half of the year, the board of directors, at its quarterly meeting, raised the possibility of adding worker incentives. 因为每个公司的生产指标有很多，所以用复数形式的production numbers.

某物的数量到底是多还是少并不清楚时，倾向于用numbers，如： In Scotland, the wild salmon’s numbers have been reduced by uncontrolled deep-sea and coastal netting, by pollution, and by various other threats to the fish’s habitat.三文鱼的数量虽然是一个数字，也用了numbers。 The gyrfalcon, an Arctic bird of prey, has survived a close brush with (A) extinction; its numbers are now five-times greater than when the use of DDT was sharply restricted in the early 1970’s.北极鸟的数量用了numbers

"instead of" contains "of", which should be followed by a noun. so, "instead of" should be followed by a noun (or by something that acts as a noun, such as some -ing forms).

on the other hand, "rather than" can connect just about any two similarly structured things.
nouns: I decided to purchase a truck rather than a car.
adjectives: I wish this transmission were manual, rather than automatic.
etc.
also, it can connect things that aren't technically the same grammatically but that play the same grammatical role. e.g.
it's best to read the passages quickly, rather than with precise attention to every little detail.
--> here, both the adverb "quickly" and the modifier "with precise attention..." modify the action of reading the passages. so, all good.

there's also a very slight difference in meaning. I'll bet you 99.99% that gmac will never actually test this, but ...
... "X instead of Y" means that "Y" was some sort of default / assumed/preferred outcome, but that X has been substituted for it.
... "X rather than Y" indicates no such preference; it just means that there were options X and Y, and, this time, X won.

e.g.
He paid with a check rather than cash.
--> He had two options, and chose the check.

He paid with a check instead of cash.
--> He was supposed to pay in cash, but he paid with a check.

again, the likelihood that this will ever actually be tested is pretty much nil, but, there it is.

ask beg intend order urge require这些既可以加to do又可以that sb (should) do sth

rob the oysters there of their flavor和make them smaller ...的不是increasing demands，而是盐度变化，应该用独立主格来表示这种影响。

A which用法错误
B it指代作物
C rob的主语是increasing demands，错误
E and making them decrease in size前面不要逗号

in spite of/despite表示转折，whereas表示对比，应该要用whereas， 排除AB

A in despite of错误，要用in spite of / despite
B previously的位置错误，that从句的时态错误，要用过去完成时
时态错误，排除CD，而且CD没有跟前面形成对比，应该是1940s, popular magazines ...., whereas previously these publications ....

主语是increases，复数，A的谓语动词用的单数，排除。
DE，缺乏谓语，排除，剩下BC
B在分号后面的部分不是一个完整的句子，排除

including后面要用and表示列举，排除AB
C里边要用such as，不能用as
E是from ... to...

digging in sediments的是scientists，排除AB
evidence是一个具体的“事件”，而不是某一个名词。
C suggesting的是一个具体的“事件“（that...）
D和E suggest的都只是“emergence”