名牌商家通过将价格差降到比五年前还要低，就可以吸引回来顾客。问削弱。
B：顾客已经很满意store brand的质量了，所以即使名牌降价，顾客也不会买，直接削弱。
D：说的是store brand由于广告费用低，所以有能力比name brand提供更低的价格。进一步分析：之前name brand顾客流失的原因是由于namebrand和storebrand价格差距太大，以至于即使namebrand质量更高，顾客也不愿意买了。那么现在价格差距减小了，我们却不能判断顾客对缩小之后的价格差的接受程度。①如果顾客认为价格差距已经小到多付一点点钱就可以获得很多很多的高质量的商品时，那顾客就会买name brand。 ②如果顾客认为缩小后的价格差还是没有达到自己的预期，自己更愿意花更少的钱买相对质量不那么高的产品，那么商家的措施还是没用。 所以，D没办法直接削弱。

C but可能會修飾到前面because這句
D補出are,清楚表示but是跟著biological traits這句

E financiers are not well-educated,而不是覺得作者論點不值得考慮

前提：no European trade goods were found；traders active from the 1620's onward.
结论：the camp probably dates to no later than 1630
D选项 新前提（弥补gap）：如何从trade证明camp的存在—建立两者之间的联系

厉害

第二段只是说在某种情况下它的缺陷，并没有质疑它的普遍可用性

最后一句话只说不同种树可能导致一个年轮不能精确代表一年，但即使不同种树，在一样的气候下也会出现相似的pattern，即使年轮不一致；即，通过有一部分树可能在一年里长出不止一个年轮的事实，不能推断出它年轮的pattern和同地区其他树在重叠的时间里年轮的pattern不一样

A.与上一个will平行，主语it指代the law，然而A be subjected B意为A受B约束，不应是the law收到约束
B.与it will句平行，且standard for 是对的，standard of是错的
C.correct
D.they are for diesel-powered vehicles中的代词是实物指代的，它必须指代前面出现过的名词，即，standards。显然地，对于柴油汽车和运动汽车，它们的标准是不同的，运动汽车的标准不可能给柴油汽车用，代词they应该改成those，表示一个新的指代物。
E.应为standard of

standards of 和 sandards for 的区别在于
是他本身的标准 还是对于他的标准
例 standards of living 生活标准
本题的standards应该是指standards of emissions for diesel-powered vehicles即对于柴油车的排放标准 而不是 standards of diesel-powered vehicles 柴油车的标准（这样的话，可能指的是柴油车的制造标准啊之类的）

range是问极差是否大于2，不是问范围

感觉A和B加起来逻辑链才完整……A说因为税法的原因富人们会少捐钱，B说这些机构的资金唯一来源是富人，这两个逻辑链加起来，才能推出这些机构会关门。

这题的重点应该放在为什么事故减少上，而不是放在为什么喝酒量没变的情况上。选项B 并没有解释为什么喝酒量没变， 只解释了事故减少的原因。

B的that指代更不好吧～that不是最好不要单独出现做指代么

不是很懂，文章的信息以已近暗含了毛毛虫会吃花粉了啊，为什么还要再强调一遍毛毛虫吃花粉这件事？

幸存者偏差。

Conversely, not all chemical signals transmitted via the VNO quality as pheromones
should be:
Conversely, not all chemical signals transmitted via the VNO qualiFy as pheromones
and that will make sense

canary金絲雀
If you say \"when + PAST PARTICIPLE\", then this automatically applies to the SUBJECT of the clause to which it\'s attached.

if i say
iron accumulates rust when submerged in water
then it\'s the iron, not the rust, that\'s submerged in water.

this strikes choice (d), since the SUBJECT is \"recently documented examples\", not \"mice\" as required.

（1）当2是n的一个质因子的时候，2n的different prime numbers和n的相等，因为2这个质因子在2n中重复了两次。
eg. n=2*3*5*7; 2n=2*2*3*5*7
当2不是n的一个质因子的时候，2n的different prime numbers比n多一个
eg. n=3*5*7; 2n=2*3*5*7
（2）n与n方个数个数应当相等
eg. n=2*3*5*7; n方=2*2*3*3*5*5*7*7

Careful, vp101. The problem with B can't be "given reason," since that is used in A, too!

The issue is with "would," but this is a little tricky. For simpler clauses, it's easy: we don't use both "if" and "would" to mark the same hypothetical event. Rather, when using "if," we follow up with "would" to show the consequence:

If my car were stolen, I would be upset.

However, if our hypothetical/conditional has more than one action in it (as in the original Q), "would" may be appropriate:

If I thought that you would believe me, I'd tell you the whole story.

So what's the difference between this and the original? You might notice that here we're using what looks like past tense ("thought"), while in A and B we're using present perfect and present, respectively. Why the difference? My example is a hypothetical (subjunctive), while the original is a simple conditional. With conditionals, we don't even use "would" for the consequence:

If Karen's sandwich falls on the floor, she will still eat it. (It's a really good sandwich.)

Since the choices here are conditional and not subjunctive, we need to leave "would" out of the sentence entirely.

转自：https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-recent-court-decision-has-qualified-a-1998-ruling-that-workers-canno-207805.html#p1593308

phenomena是复数记下了；
总结起来像是低分裤看语法，高分裤看语意？ 这题看语法的主谓一致和插入语的标点符号可排除ACD，也可以看语意是否有句间转折关系排除ACD, 具体哪种就见仁见智吧。E项应该是先看平行

感觉变成until the 1970s应该会好理解一点为什么用had enterd
很奇怪国外的论坛里此题的都有until，但国内却没有。。。