法律类的名词后面加定语一般用doing形式一般不用定语从句
on the ground that ... 以…为理由,以…为借口
on the grounds that prep.由于,以...为理由
on the allegation that ... 理由是…,根据…理由
on the assumption that adv.假设
on the assumption that ... 以为…,假定…
A，becaus后面只能接句子
C，you can't use 'resulting from' as an adverbial modifier, as is done here. in general, 'resulting from' is only used as an adjective modifier, almost always without a comma, as in
the pollution resulting from the chemical spill forced all the local residents to evacuate.
DE：there is nothing wrong with saying 'there is x'. this construction is basically equivalent to 'x exists' (if x is a thing), or 'x happens' (if x is an event).
the problem, though, is that "the intentional discarding of lens caps, packing material , fuel tanks and payload covers" IS the "littering".
so, sentences D and E are not logical.
because of' must be followed by SOMETHING ELSE that is actually the cause of something.
'with' should be followed by a component or part of the previous observation.
note that the correct answer is phrased in a way that removes this problem.
the correct answer says "orbits ... have become more and more littered". in this version, "littered" means roughly the same as 'dirty' or 'polluted'.
笔记-插入语：
1. 形容词或形容词短语作插入语，worst still, sure enough, strange, most important of all等。例句：Strange, there is nobody in the classroom.
2. 副词或副词短语作插入语。personally, honestly, fortunately, luckily, for us, though, besides, exactly, surely, frankly, still otherwise 等。
3. 介词短语作插入语。of course, in short, as a matter of fact, by the way, On the contrary, on the other hand, in my opinion, in conclusion等。
4. 现在分词短语作插入语。generally speaking, judging from/ by ..., talking of..., considering...等。例句：Considering his age, he did very well.
5. 过去分词短语作插入语。例句：Painted white, we like the house better.
解析：之所以称它为插入语，是由于这种过去分词是独立的，没有逻辑主语。
6. 动词不定式作插入语。to be sure, to be frank（坦率地说）,to tell you the truth（说实话）,so to speak（可以说）等。
7. 代词词组作插入语。all the same（尽管如此）,all told（总共）,all in all（总的来说）等。
8. 句子：I say /hear, I think /hope / believe, you know / see, what’s more, that is (to say), I’m afraid, do you think / suppose等。
例句：It’s a great mistake, I think, not to accept their proposal.
9. 从句：if so / not / any, if I may say so, if you don’t mind, as you know, as you say 等。
例句：This man, as you know, is good for nothing.
10. 用标点符号引导插入语。例句：He was (strange as it seems) an excellent sportsman.
the problem with (c) is NOT grammatical; the grammar of (c) is just fine.
the problem with (c) is that it uses two different transitions incorrectly.
* if you say "subject + clause + BY VERBing", then "by VERBing" must explain HOW the main clause occurred.
e.g.
i prepared for the test by reviewing takeaways on the MGMAT forums.
note that the boldface clause describes HOW i prepared for the test.
choice (c) means that using websites, etc. was how the industry organized the campaign -- in other words, they used the websites and public meetings to organize the campaign in the first place. that's an incorrect meaning.
(the campaign ITSELF used these things; the correct modifier in (a) and (b) shows that relationship.)
* if you say "subject + clause + IN VERBing", then subject + clause must be an ACTUAL PART of the action of VERBing.
e.g.
i solved all the problems in OG12 in preparing for the GMAT.
--> notice that solving the problems IS ACTUALLY PART OF preparing for the test.
choice (c) fails here, too, since organizing the campaign (the main clause) is not ACTUALLY PART OF convincing the government.
choice (e) has two problems.
the first is "in convincing", which is wrong for the same reason why it's wrong in choice (c). see above.
the other is incorrect verb tense. "which used" (simple past tense) shouldn't be in a tense occurring prior to "has organized" (present perfect). this construction mistakenly suggests that the campaign "used X, Y, and Z" before it was even organized in the first place.
RON:if you say "twice as many", then this construction should be paired with a countable noun./
e.g., twice as many dogs --> "dogs" is a countable noun/
if you said "twice as much", then this construction should be paired with an uncountable noun./
e.g., twice as much water --> "water" is an uncountable noun/
if the noun in question is already an explicitly numerical quantity, then you should use neither "much" nor "many". instead, you should just use "twice" or "double" by itself./
e.g., twice the increase --> "increase" is an explicitly numerical quantity/
these rules are followed pretty closely./
so, for instance:/
twice as much water --> correct, since "water" is an uncountable noun (but is not an explicitly numerical quantity)/
twice the water... --> incorrect, since water is not a numerical quantity/
twice as much as the increase... --> incorrect; redundant/
twice the increase... --> correct/
引用：这里不能出现任何与former 有关的词，一是因为后面的for 18 years，不能做前主席18年；二是从平行和逻辑一致性考虑，后面的board menber也没用former。这个句子看不出JP到底还在不在位子上，如果要把前主席的意思表达出来，可以用同位语+定语：the former chair of the planning board who was in that position for 18 consecutive years and the former board member working for 28 years, Joan Philkill …… for his duty
ome initial considerations:
- the proper idiomatic form with 'made it possible...' is FOR noun INFINITIVE.
- the sentence contains a comparison, so you should be thinking about parallelism from the outset.
choice a:
- 'make it possible ... are able to' is redundant
- i'm not sure about 'compares' as a verb in the active voice here (although i'm not confident enough to give you a straight 'no' on the issue). to me, 'is comparable to' looks better than 'compares to' (although it's possible that both are acceptable).
choice b:
- 'to have' is unclear (who HAS the cameras? the sentence leaves that issue totally unresolved)
- 'at' is unidiomatic (you capture images WITH a degree of fidelity)
- 'with' is not properly parallel (should be 'of')
choice c: CORRECT
- proper idiom: make it possible FOR noun INFINITIVE
- 'with' = proper idiom
- proper, parallel comparison: the DEGREE of fidelity is comparable to THAT (i.e., the degree of fidelity) of 35mm film
choice d:
- change of meaning: the original sentence doesn't assert that the cameras are now possible, but, rather, that existing cameras can be improved.
- improper comparison: this sentence literally compares a DEGREE of fidelity to 35mm FILM (not logically comparable / parallel items)
choice e:
- change of meaning: the original sentence doesn't assert that the cameras are now possible, but, rather, that existing cameras can be improved.
- 'that with' should be 'that of'
in/during/over：
in强调在某个时间点，in 1997；during在……期间，强调时间范围，在某个时间范围里的每一个时间点，如Please remain seated during the performance. 演出期间请不要站起来；over强调时间的跨越，在某个时间里一直/从头至尾
**句意：The steel industry has changed radically...,as...companies...that...have greatly downsized,...
钢铁工业完全改变因为xxx的公司已大幅减少...
• "with" is followed by a noun (or noun + modifiers), and NEVER by a complete sentence.
• "as", in this context, connects two complete sentences.
• ,such as xxx, 直接忽略
"until healing" would apply to the subject "swelling and stiffness". those don't heal; the injured area does. therefore, you need a construction that changes the subject to "the injured area" -- or a pronoun that stands for those words, as in the actual correct answer.
D中的it指代injured area
扫描二维码，直接登录
D，they无指代