it' is ambiguous, becauseit could potentially refer either to 'course of action' (the intendedantecedent) or to 'incipient trouble'. also note that grammatical parallelismdoesn't help: both of those possible antecedents areobjects of prepositions - neither is the subject of its own clause (which wouldthereby create parallelism with 'it', which is the subject of its clause).
makes it likely to miss... this doesn't work. technically, this would mean that "it" - an unspecified entity - is likely to miss the signs. if you use the "it is ADJ..." construction, and the verb has aspecific subject, you MUST include that subject in the construction. it is likely that the executive will miss...
C can be eliminated on at least two other grounds:
• it's nonsense. ice caps and sea levels are physical objects; they're not "consequences" of anything. (the changes in these things are the "consequences" here.)
• the tense of "is/are __ing" describes things that are happening at present. this tense is thus inappropriate for the discussion of potential future consequences.
REDUNDANCY: possible ... may
PARALLELISM:
A/ (these are like "writing a book" || "a written book")
B/ if we ignore modifiers, the core nouns are "the melting" || "the sea level" (Melting :- Gerund; Rising : Adjective.)
C/ perfect match.
D/ no match. same problem as (a).
E/ perfect match.
本句想强调的点是它以什么什么命名，放在主句。
C选项：where they have been first discovered in 1932中的discover需改为一般过去时。这是因为，discover是一个点动词，没有“到现在为止”发现，只能在过去发现。（也可以由明确的过去时间（1932）要用过去时，不能用现在完成时来解释）
who was a jazz pianist and composer是非限定性定语从句，其会让人读者认为Thelonious Monk仅在过去（was）是爵士乐钢琴家和作曲家。但在逻辑上，显然Thelonious Monk其实一直是钢琴家和作曲家，即，应该用同位语a jazz pianist and composer而不该用定语从句。
问题问的是同时解释三个现象的factor
B项：This helps explain all three factors. It suggests that each company has had to boost its research spending, but with a narrowing of focus to produce mass-market drugs with enormous potential for profit. This narrowing of focus could explain why fewer drugs are being patented.
Salim的话说明这句话”If those segments also provide significant support to Mr. Quintana, then no segment of the electorate that provides significant support to Mr. Quintana provides significant support to Mr. Ramirez.”的结论then...是假，所以其前提if...也是假，即得出：这些支持P的选区全部支持Q是假
扫描二维码，直接登录
B中前半句话没有提到