对标分析

people who have graduated from school X ...which actually MAKES SENSE
vs.
people having graduated from school X ...which is NONSENSE
(because "having graduated" can't be temporary -- once someone HAS GRADUATED from somewhere, that's true forever)

"...that/who [verb]s" implies that [verb]ing is a permanent or fundamental aspect of the noun that's described.
"...[verb]ing", on the other hand, implies that it's temporary and can/will change.

i can actually say, with a fair amount of confidence, that you can safely just ELIMINATE choices that have "NOUN + having been __ed" (WITHOUT a comma).

more generally, you can just memorize that "because of VERBing..." isn't a thing, in sentences like this one. if this can be rephrased specifically to "because something/someone VERB...", then ALWAYS pick that version, and NEVER pick "because of VERBing...".

为啥不是A，只有两个不是可以体现很少吗

injured用被动表示受伤。
had become是因为相对1783这个时间点，她已经ill了。
join，injure和discharge并列。

注意理解句子关系，C比D更合适，leak和pollute是主从关系，不是并列关系

谓语动词has nearly doubled的主语的核心词变为Twenty-one ceramic dog figurines。但在逻辑上，发出两倍这个动作的只能是“发现”这个事件，不能是figurines本身。
醍醐灌顶。

1. ABC的in addition to and besides 都是介词用法，后面接名词或者名词成分，例如动名词和从句。最大的错误是两个用语后面的名词成分都必须在句子中与一个成份形成实际意义上的语义逻辑上的平行关系。而ABC里的possibility在后面句子中找不到对应的词。
2. ABC的It指代问题，应该是leaves，复数
3. D and E, D的possible ＋动名词 preventing and inhibiting没有E的possibly preventing or inhibiting好，原因有二，一是 D中and不如E中or在语义逻辑上更准确。Ron说这两个词是mutually exclusive，不可能用and同时发生，肯定是or。同理还有一个句子里有damage and destroy，也是应该用OR，而不能用and；二是 D中possible修饰preventing 以及inhibiting，应该用副词形式修饰这两个动作。若用形容词的possible，就用prevention更合适。

缺谓语动词。。。坑。。。

幸存者偏差

销售量=进口+本地生产量，本地生产量=人均生产量*工人数量。
销售量不变，工人数量下降，结论：进口多，作者默认了本地生产量下降，即认为人均生产量不变。

Andrew overscore= 9/1+1=10. Jackson overscore= (5+6+7)/3 + 3=9. so ratio is 10/9. Understand the meaning

题目中隐含了一个默认逻辑应该是16世纪的表演风格和18世纪的相似，或者说18世纪的表演风格是从16世纪传承下来的，才能推出演员模仿了marx,但是marx是16世纪风格，而剧是18世纪的剧本，演员的表演很贴近剧本这个结论。

枚举推理

我觉得这是类比推理，在欧洲大陆发生过火山喷发后的冬天很冷的事情，所以推断所有火山喷发都会导致气候变冷。C为一个反例，推翻结论。

这篇文章看了翻译依然很难懂，两个观点分别不是那么的大，只是在定义上有一些区别而已。。。

虽然定位对了，还是选错了

among them是介宾短语，修饰不到posts，只能作状语，语义不对