请问E选项中and so they are是什么结构？so在这里起什么作用

D中feature是suggesting的逻辑主语。但是我觉得feature来进行拟人不是特别好。而B中的 ，+n. 可以来概括前面的整个句子，起到和suggesting一样的作用。。。即使feature可以进行拟人来做出suggest的动作，为什么B是不正确的？

为什么the stars和the planets显然不是一种东西。。。不都是星星吗。。。

为什么reducing不能就近修饰event

E中的 两个不同成分不能平行，一个定于一个同位语， MARK。

1-乍看先保留了AB (⊙﹏⊙)
2-排除C，句子结构不完整，缺谓语
3-排除DE，动词不定式的用法不对
剩下AB，根据事件发生的事件顺序，先发现再命名，然后再解释这星。。。就酱，B
我也给我自己留note。。其实我第二遍还是错了

看到题目的时候我想fail这里是外延内涵。当时我认为是fail这个行为必然有一个终点的，不然不会被起诉，所以我选择B。
在看到答案的时候我只能通过说 律师起诉的是一个行为，这个行为一直存在，所以说是没有终点的-ing或者that。
我不确定这样是否正确，请指正

老师，可以看成是果因推理吗？

在逻辑上，进步本身是不会杀害任何人的，真正杀害大批人的应该是“毁坏和奴役（devastation and enslavement）”。

A: 在这个主句发生时，同位语the largest share for any country to contribute since 1890不会产生任何状态的变化。即，contribute事件是去解释超过四分之一这个数据的，不会因主句的发生与否而存在或消失（墨西哥人占据还是不占据四分之一，这个四分之一都是自从1890年以来最大的百分比）。

可是social是形容词，economic是名词，用and放一块怪怪的啊。

mark－“提出对方案来说的一件好事并不能加强方案，要说方案“没”有副作用。”

A: this statement is direct evidence against the idea that budworms are the source of the problem, since it provides an example of a species that doesn't eat budworms but has experienced exactly the same decline.

看不懂

税收减少，其中一部分不变则另一部分一定会减少

定位frequency到第二段中间But pre-1830 cases have been cited as frequently as later decisions,。。。。 provided a lasting foundation for patent law. 1830年前和后面的一样多，到今天也一样，were a just recompense，所有信息表示没有什么变化。再看选项B、D、E都是说没有变化的。返回文章看But上一句 If early judicial decisions were prejudiced against patentees, one might expect that subsequent courts—allegedly more supportive of patent rights—would reject the former legal precedents. 里面说了supportive of patent rights，所以最终确认选择B。

还没明白B到底错在哪里了..

D: illogical: the sentence means that the trend is "placing" the women in these positions right now (since the main clause is in the present).
-ING modifiers don't have a tense. they automatically adopt the tense of the clause to which they're attached.
E: incorrect. "which" can't modify the preceding sentence

A: wrong. the participle 'placing', which wrongly indicates that this trend is already placing more women in leadership positions.
C: wrong. the relative pronoun 'which' is placed in a position where it must refer to 'women'. this is wrong for 2 reasons: (a) 'which' can't refer to people, (b) according to the sentence, women don't place themselves in leadership positions; the trend does.