during身后需要连接一个独立而确定的时间段（例如five years），而不能连接类似于recent times这样的模糊时间
"Up" is redundant, since "until" already carries this meaning.
• The sentence implies that the Inuit are no longer nomads.
If they were still nomads, the sentence wouldn't say "until recently"; it would say "until now" (or some equivalent). Remember that "recently", albeit not too long ago, is still a time in the past.
So, you need the past tense.
more than three times as many 【independent institutions of higher education charge tuition and fees of under $8,000 a year 】as 【 ( independent institutions of higher education) charge over $16,000】.
选项A：首先，since应改为over。介词since身后只能接时间点而不能接时间段。例如：
since 1989, since today
over身后通常接时间段，例如：
over 3 days, over one month.
因此，由于the past few years是一个时间段，所以不能用since来连接。由于主语的核心词movement是一个单数名词，需将have改为has。
Contrary to身后是名词+定语从句的结构，因此，整个Contrary to financial analysts, who predicted last year that the market for home computers would dwindle的核心词为financial analysts。但在逻辑上，能和the personal computer industry continued to show strong growth（个人电脑工业具有强劲的增长）具有“相反”的关系的，只能是分析师的预期，而不能是分析师。
in B) making beneficiaries pay 20% of cost is acting as the adverbial -ing of the whole structure of ( Medicare,....,covers the full cost of...but not of other non hospital service, making......) Thus the meaning doesn't make sense
aving done 结构肯定是做状语的修饰主句的动作的，不是定语来修饰名词的。如果你having done结构只是来修饰一个名词的，那何谈和名词的先后顺序的？ 那什么时候 现在分词doing 做定语呢？在GMAT中 如果 doing结构不加逗号直接放在名词后面，往往都是做定语的，所以我们可以推断出: having done 是永远不会做定语的。具体来说 也就是永远不会没有逗号而存在。
1. men and women，所以要用themselves，排除CE
2. D选项还原 it had previously been considered of men and women they were incapable of discerning truth for themselves ，首先引导从句省略了that，其次句意完全读不通，所以排除
3. having been done只能做状语
倍数的比较：
(1)x times as much/big as B
(2)x times more/bigger than B
(3) A is x times B 或 x times that numbers of B
charge通常后面跟东西，如：charge ¥3 for the pen，也可以直接用charge for sth表示就某物收费的意思（不说到底收多少），如：
Do you think museums should charge for admission? 你认为博物馆应该收入场费吗？
本题，three times the price that the drug's maker charges for another product，that指代the price，被比较对象还原成“the drug's maker charges (the price) for another product，完美
选项A：（√）原句句意
Approved April 24, 1800, the act of Congress that made provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., also established the Library of Congress.
1800 年 4 月 24 日批准的国会法案规定将美国政府迁至新的联邦城市华盛顿特区（从句是背景--大事件），该法案还建立了国会图书馆（主句--小时件）。
选项E：（×）establishing作为伴随结果，改变句意
Approved April 24, 1800, the act of Congress made provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., also【establishing】 the Library of Congress.
1800 年 4 月 24 日通过的国会法案规定将美国政府迁至新的联邦城市华盛顿特区，导致/同时 建立国会图书馆。
只有forbid 可以接to do sth，prohibit sb from doing sth
forbid/prohibit都可以接名词或动名词，禁止某个行为
e.g. prohibit/forbid smoking in my home；smoking in my home is prohibited/forbidden
【The Acoma and Hopi 】are probably the two oldest surviving Pueblo communities, 【both dating】 back at least a thousand years.
【阿科马人和霍皮人】可能是现存最古老的两个普韦布洛社区，【这两种人都可以追溯到】至少一千年。
Aboth dating不是伴随状语，而是独立主格，在此表示补充说明，与each型独立主格同一原理
B. both of 【which（×） 远距离跳跃修饰】 have dated
C. 【and （×）修饰改成了并列】each has dated
代词the ones指代有误。这个代词通常用于指代前面出现过的一堆人或物种的几个，例如：
I planted a lot of roses in my garden. The ones in white I like the best.
例句中的the ones指代的是a lot of roses中的几朵。在本题中，显然同一群人不可能即被鲨鱼咬死又被蜜蜂咬死。
C) so gradual that they are unable to be distinguished
This one is tough, because it's not grammatically or idiomatically incorrect. "So... that" is a correct idiom. It's certainly wordier than A, and there also seems to be a disconnect in meaning. If something is "indistinguishable," then people are not able to distinguish it. Here, saying that the "shifts... are unable to be distinguished," then the lack of ability is on the part of the shifts, and not on the people distinguishing. This is a case in which passive voice alters the meaning slightly, and therefore makes less sense.
in the construction "it is (adjective) for XXXX to (verb)", the adjective describes what XXXX experience(s) in trying to (verb).
e.g.,
This book is hard for me to read.
(I experience difficulty in reading this book.)
It is difficult for Liz to talk to her ex-husband.
(liz has trouble talking to her ex. we don't know whether the converse is true.)
so, choice E is saying that the appliances themselves have to spend a lot of money "to be bought on credit". well, that doesn't make any sense.
also，even if your knowledge of these constructions is nil, you should still be able to kill E because it's so terribly wordy and clunky, as compared to the other choices.
(no, wordiness is not an actual error... but the correct answers are NEVER more wordy / less efficient than the incorrect answers. thus, you can still use differences in wordiness as viable criteria for elimination.)
扫描二维码，直接登录
C选项whereas后面没有spend的主语，不构成和前句的逻辑关系。