求解， B选项

毕老师，可不可以解答一下of和that在作定语修饰名词的时候的区别，从您的书上看到过范畴逻辑的相关解释，但是这个点还是比较犹豫，是不是修饰部分的核心为一个词或者短语的时候用of，修饰部分为一个事件（核心词为动词）的时候用that。

为什么不选c呢，减少一个才能增加另一个呀？
a里面的 in the amount allocated the previous year不是有点奇怪么？减少去年的什么量呢？

讲实话，根据曼哈顿的习语，DE直接排除，只有as 而不是to be， A的conception不够简洁，B中的but 后面不是完整结构

alphabets derive from XXX

主语that定从的修饰就近原则

错选D，excited无论做什么都需要be动词

D。some of which无法跳跃修饰several posts，因为这个 several posts within the Democratic party during his first term被两个介词短语修饰，如果只是several posts within the Democratic party的话，那么which可以跳过修饰posts，但是两个就跳不过去了

c选项的twice as much as是不是也错了呢？数字后面加twice as much as

分析这道题的时候，BD其实没有很明显的错误，但是由于要选最优，那么就近修饰肯定比BD的跳跃修饰更清晰 所以选E

B就算把were改成was也是有歧义,不如A. A is more like B than C. 
这个句子在中文里类似的话就是: 小明更像他爷爷比起他爸爸来.
这句话是小明更像他爷爷(比起他爸爸像他爷爷)? 还是 小明更像他爷爷(比起小明像他爸爸).

这个题一定要注意including的一个大坑！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！E是being为数不多的正确用法

一个比较独特的相关到因果的题目。题目的推理是：corn今年种的多（这是一个与往年比不同寻常的因素），所以就是吃corn的虫子导致了cotton的虫害。也就是说，是一个外因影响了这件事的发生。那么，如果确实是这个外因的话，普通的不防cotton虫害的cotton应该就会以同样的规模减产，因为普通和防cotton虫的cotton对于corn虫的抵抗能力都很差。B的逻辑就是这个了

J: The loss of 10,000 rentals was all Videorama's fault.
B: That's not possible, since Videorama only sold 4000 videos.
to WEAKEN brad's objection, you have to COME UP WITH A WAY FOR 4000 SALES TO CANCEL OUT 10,000 RENTALS.
(a) is irrelevant to this issue.
(e) provides a perfect reason why the 4000 sales could, indeed, compensate for the 10,000 rentals: if the sold videos are loaned around, then each of them could cancel out multiple rentals.

相关到因果推理。smoke 和 positive lightning之间是相关关系，只要排除掉二者之间的相关性就好了。

首先根据并列还是修饰的关系，可以排除CD，BE中的Which无法跳过are去修饰Acoma and Hopi，所以不如A的dating

首先很明显D的paying错，再由并列和修饰的逻辑关系排除B，剩下ACE,然后paying和payment的split可以由句子意思看出：句子想表达拖欠医生的工资，强调的是付工资的这个动作，而不是付工资这个名词，所以应该选paying，这样就剩BE，那么现在根据简洁原则，it可以省略，而且个人认为省略掉反而使得but后面句子主语更清晰，用it的话前面还有好几个单数名词，虽然能靠句意知道指的是谁，但是这样读起来比较费劲，而且句子后面的代词its是赘余的，最后E胜出

"the increase in X" means that X itself has increased. therefore, "the increase in the previous year" doesn't make sense, because the implication would be that the previous year itself had increased (what would that possibly mean?).

"the increase of TIME PERIOD", by contrast, means exactly what it should mean in this particular instance.

by contrast, the -ING FOLLOWED BY A COMMA modifies the entire action of the preceding clause. this is exactly what you want to happen, because the actual rising of the # of people flying first class is what "doubled the increase of...". there's no noun in there that pinpoints this concept, so you have to use a modifier that modifies the entire clause.