like不是不能用于举例嘛?
和其他学校招新人成功的概率一样,削弱并说明在招新人方面并没有exceptionally high
从18 年4月16号开始 Quantitative Reasoning时间改为62分钟,题量改为31道了.
如果是一个assumption题,感觉B是对的
m-5=n(n-1),判断n(n-1)为偶数,odd-5=偶数,可以得出m=odd
条件一:x^2+y^2>z^2,可知不等式两边都大于0,将两边同时平方,不等号的方向不变。得到:x^4+y^4+2(x^2)(y^2)>z^4,因为2(x^2)(y^2)是大于0的,所以条件一不能推出x^4+y^4>z^4
举例子:6,8,9
曼哈顿讲平行那章说,linking verbs are parallelism markers. To read is to feel
我觉得E有点废话的意思。。。。。说了most,又不是all,肯定有考虑到个别人的问题啊
枚举推理!![答案要提到样本:大多数员工]
纠结在DE
D提到了样本员工,但是E在讲工作月份,未提到样本
看清楚问题
题目说的是新口味会不会提高利润。E探讨的是品牌忠诚的问题,忠实于其他品牌的消费者不会因为新口味而来买这个牌子,但这个牌子的消费者和那些没有brand loyalty 的消费者 不知道会不会选新口味
对对
我开始以为CIn order to offer more flexible schedules to their workers, several businesses in the office building will soon be expanding their hours.
是expending hours的话会叫员工早点来上班,其实不是这样。
划线后还有一个as
a is wrong because of the participle 'placing', which wrongly indicates that this trend is already placing more women in leadership positions.
c is wrong because the relative pronoun 'which' is placed in a position where it must refer to 'women'. this is wrong for 2 different reasons: (a) 'which' can't refer to people, and (b) according to the sentence, women don't place themselves in leadership positions; the trend does.
change in meaning: the correct meaning is what appears in the original sentence, namely, that the failure to honor promises WAS the deceptive business practice. choice e, with its use of 'because', implies that the failure to keep promises LED TO (other) deceptive business practices.
Even though it was not illegal for the bank to share its customers' personal and financial information with an outside marketing company in return for a commission on sales, the state's attorney general accused the bank of engaging in deceptive business practices by failing to honor its promise to its customers to keep records private.
a, this is an ongoing or cumulative trend, continuing into the present from some designated starting point
b, this is a fundamental truth
注意C选项:表示原因的词如because of后面要跟核心词!!分别是drugs和doctors。在逻辑上,原因应该是“药物变贵”和“医生开处方”这两件事,而不是药和医生这两个名词[又是物/事的问题]
it、they的指代
平行问题
我不太懂。。。这道题的论点难道不是——胜诉制度不会增加医疗失误的诉讼数量吗?那我这个逻辑和胜诉制度外的任何事情有关系吗。。。没有这个胜诉option人们诉讼量增多增少不影响胜诉制度单边对医疗失误的诉讼数量的影响啊?为什么b是对的......
没太看懂你在说啥,说一下我对这道题的想法吧。 前提:现在官司打赢才给钱,不赢不要钱。理论上这个制度会增加很多官司,但是医疗官司的量没提高(P.S.虽然我并不知道为什么这个制度会导致官司数量提高)。结论:肯定是律师把没胜算的官司都拒绝了。问削弱? B说很多人就算知道能打赢,但是律师费很高,所以不值得提出诉讼。很好的削弱了结论,都没人对医疗官司提起诉讼,何来拒绝变多?
律师拒绝没胜算的官司是原因