"引用“
同位语与状语相比时，通常同位语更有利于表意；但这里同位语与独立句比较时，却是独立句能更好地表意。（还是要抽主干-分析语意）
A/E考语意：
两个事件：1、她在某个时间段处于政治事件中心；2、这样一个时间段结合她的才华使她成为很棒的历史学家
按照图形背景原则，最合理的逻辑应该是2作主句，1作定语或原因状语："某个时间段结合她的才华使她成为很棒的历史学家，这个时间段里她处于政治事件中心"；
E选项1、2并列，“她在某个时间段处于政治事件中心，and这样一个时间段结合她的才华使她成为很棒的历史学家”，逻辑也是可以的
但如A里1作主句、2作同位语则一定是错的："她在某个时间段处于政治事件中心，这是一个与她才华结合使她成为很棒的历史学家的时间段."是本末倒置，作者想说的是她是一个很棒的历史学家，她处于政治事件中心只是她是很棒的历史学家的原因之一，不应该作主句。

动词的主被动关系需要抓准！！！renew在这里是被动

关键在于survey的对象是从f出来的人，而没有s出来的人。对比的是顾客在f超市买的东西和s超市货架上的东西的价格。a的意思说f的客户买的都是最便宜的东西，换句话说，也就是f的客户买的东西都是打折的，而s的这些商品也许没有在打折，然后用打折的商品对比f原价商品(也许其他商品在打折），所以不能得出结论f更省钱。

是的（欢迎来到我的自问自答大观园）

"引用下面的回答“
A、B、C里compare都是 伴随，主语是this group表示了同一群人（即都是1910年出生的那些人），把同一群人和百分比比较，不合理
D unlike比较对象不对
E是定语成分，正确

（A）or前后have been和have been平行
（B）ineffective修饰drug prescription是不对的，不是说这个方案就是无效的，只是剂量用的有问题（句意！！！！）
（C）as后面跟句子
（D）or前后时态不一致
（E）or前后不平行

我认为A的主要问题还是在于，NP's clues是NP拥有的clues，不如C好

B和C前半部主句其实意思都还可以，问题在于B选项后面when可以做定语修饰1980，但C选项后面comma+介词 必为状语，导致修饰到了they were这个状态

在A E 之间不确定是因为觉得 they也有可能指代到social interactions，但就算代入也会发现具有破坏性的不会是interactions而是lying谎言，所以怎么指都不对

排除法，sporadic零星的movement，并未提及

这道题的文段，有2个推理：
推理1：没有怀孕的母老鼠 + 刚出生的小老鼠——> 有母性行为出现
推理2：出现母性行为的没有怀孕的母老鼠+去掉这些母老鼠的嗅觉+去掉小老鼠的腺体——>母性行为的时间缩短
问题问的是，推理1和推理2之间的gap在哪里？（为什么推理1和推理2两件事情都会发生）

所以当然是E啦：因为让母老鼠产生母性行为的核心原因是小老鼠的味道Odor，所以当科学家将母老鼠的嗅觉除掉，以及把小老鼠排汗的腺体去掉，母老鼠就闻不到小老鼠的味道，因此就会缩短shortern 母性泛滥的时间了

A：in male/female 做定语修饰increase
C: for male/female 做状语修饰 has been slight这个状态

独立主格又没看出来找错考点，each不要和复数搭配，所以A B E 都错，C 可以用定语从句，但错误在于从句里没有动词，所以答案是D

粗心错，未画线部分成分画错了，前面都是定语修饰石头（看成了石头被发现orz）
A B 区别在于两件事情是平行还是修饰（很明显时间都不一样，所以必定平行）
C 变成过去分词短语，后面and thus cited也是过去分词短语，整句话没有动词
D 也没动词
E 没主句

include A and B
D 错在they 指代错误，应该指代动物，但指代成了动物的神经元

if the specialists evolved independently on each island, then a specialist on one island would be more closely related to other types of anoles on the same island-regardless of their ecological niches-than it would be to a similar specialist on a different island.

DNA evidence concerning the anoles led researchers to conclude that habitat specialists on one island are not closely related to the same habitat specialists elsewhere, indicating that specialists evolved independently on each island.

这两句话定位

resemble的原因是lizard species differ from.....？
相像的原因是不同，请问这是怎么理解的呀？

题目过于容易了。我640的水平考出了760分2333

robbing the oysters there of their flavor and making them smaller

是伴随状语，主语是 increasing demands。 但是，难道不应该是alter the saline content 造成的么？

Diction; Logical predication
The sentence as written is not stated clearly. For example, it is unclear what
is shaped so smoothly and perfectly; it could be either the airplanes or
the wings. Upon considering the likely intended meaning, along with a review
of the other answer choices, it seems most likely that the phrase is intended to
modify frictionless wings.
Next, we need to consider whether it makes more sense to say that the wings
are smooth or shaped smoothly. This issue can be determined only by
considering the most plausible intended meaning rather than by considering
just the grammar of the sentence. The idea of being smoothly shaped would
seem already to be part of the idea of being shaped perfectly, and therefore it
is redundant. On the other hand, having a surface that is very smooth would
be crucial in a quest to make an airplane wing frictionless; for this reason, it
makes sense to point out that the wings themselves are smooth.

A. This choice is incorrect for the reasons stated above.
B. Correct. Given the repetition of the word wings, it is clear that what
follows modifies wings and not airplanes. Describing the wings
as smooth and perfectly shaped clearly conveys what is most likely
intended.
C. In this version, note that shaped is modified. For this reason, proper
grammar requires that the adverbs smoothly and perfectly are needed
rather than the adjectives smooth and perfect. However, as discussed
previously, the intended meaning of the sentence would be better
conveyed if we used the adjective smoothto modify wings rather than the
adverb smoothly to modify shaped.
D. It is initially unclear what is being described as having been shaped in
such a smooth and perfect manner; it could be either the airplane or its

wings. Even if that were clarified, however, the sentence would be flawed:
the sentence is intended to describe the wings themselves, not
the manner in which the wings were shaped. That is, this wording could
be interpreted as referring to the nature of the wings themselves or to the
process through which they were made. This ambiguity makes the
meaning of the sentence unclear.
E. This version is very awkwardly worded, mainly because of having been.
Furthermore, this version describes the act of shaping the wings. Because
the sentence is instead meant to describe the wings themselves, this
choice is incorrect.