从句说artifacts做了什么事情，主句需要提及这个artifacts才能与从句形成转折，artifacts应该是imitate的宾语，BCE中they（artifacts）都不是imitate的宾语，C中没提到artifacts，都不对

(B) older than any of their supposed (adjective) Mediterranean predecessors. *supposed predecessors
(D) older than any of their supposedly (adverb)Mediterranean predecessors. **supposedly Mediterranean

居然是少数民族......

引用：the differentiating factor between (a) and (d) is the placement of the "such" modifier.
"such" should be placed AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE to the NOUN THAT IS EMPHASIZED in context.

here are two examples to illustrate:

* i've never seen another store with such a variety of beverages as these ones.
--> the VARIETY is the point; i've never seen a store with this many different beverages.

B。initiatives that try to：不是initiative去try，而是人用initiative去try

the rate is lower than the rate has been ever before

if 意为如果，一般引导条件状语从句，whether意为是否，可用于二选一，可以引导表语从句

whereby大部分用作副词，表示方式，意为通过，借此，偶尔也用作连词

so as 看作是结果状语，修饰found的动作，这个逻辑不成立

two Swiss psychologists...和none could be taken seriously两个句子之间没有连接词不影响吗？

这道题目是想在抑郁症和吸烟之间建立联系，这里就存在抑郁症导致吸烟和吸烟导致抑郁症两种联系。因而A选项，排除了抑郁症导致吸烟，就可以加强吸烟导致抑郁症的可能性。

老师讲的赞：引力直接产生热，咱们早就被烫死了。所以引力产生收缩力然后产热，比较合逻辑。 排除D

can refer to ron: https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forums/the-32-species-that-make-up-the-dolphin-family-t6878.html

弄清楚有几个发言人 几个立场

演绎推理

a不是倒装么？倒装被这样修饰有啥问题吗？

there's no way that "...whose families have..." could grammatically refer to the blood pressure.
i'm pretty sure that the gmat restricts the pronoun "whose" to people and maybe animals; for instance, i don't think you're going to see something like "the can whose lid i ripped off" on the test.

by the way, the improper use of the conjunction "and" makes (c) not even a sentence at all.

等等，wordy这样的解释我觉得是说得通的，OG里面不是时不时都会出现这种解释么。
另外毕老师解释的没有被预测和不能被预测之类，正确选项的cannot be foreseen，跟not foreseeable是等价的，强行用语义来解释更容易造成未来做题时候的混淆和时间的浪费吧

RON：in this case, parallel structure is pretty easy. the sentence makes it clear that you're comparing novels, not their authors, so (a), (c), and (d) are instantly out because their second halves mistakenly mention the people themselves as part of the comparison.
(b) is not as parallel as (e), either. since the original says "jean toomer's cane", the others should also have the form "X's Y", not "Y by X".

D為啥錯～