文章：According to many analysts, labor-management relations in the United States are undergoing a fundamental change: traditional adversarialism is giving way to a new cooperative relationship between the two sides and even to concessions from labor. These analysts say the twin shocks of nonunion competition in this country and low-cost, high-quality imports from abroad are forcing unions to look more favorably at a variety of management demands: the need for wage restraint and reduced benefits as well as the abolition of "rigid" work rules, seniority rights, and job classifications. Sophisticated proponents of these new developments cast their observations in a prolabor light. n return for their concessions, they point out, some unions have bargained for profit sharing, retraining rights, and job--security guarantees. Unions can also trade concessions for more say on the shop floor, where techniques such as quality circles and quality-of-work­ life programs promise workers greater control over their own jobs. Unions may even win a voice in investment and pricing strategy, plant location, and other major corporate policy decisions previously reserved to management. Opponents of these concessions from labor argue that such concessions do not save jobs, but either prolong the agony of dying plants or finance the plant relocations that employers had intended anyway. Companies make investment decisions to fit their strategic plans and their profit objectives, opponents point out, and labor costs are usually just a small factor in the equation. Moreover, unrestrained by either loyalty to their work force or political or legislative constraints on their mobility, the companies eventually cut and run, concessions or no concessions. Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century. They point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. Moreover, high wages have given workers the buying power to propel the economy forward. f proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers. Further, they argue that if unions willingly engage in concession bargaining on the false grounds that labor costs are the source of a company's problems, unions will find themselves competing with Third World pay levels-a competition they cannot win. 想请问郭老师，这题opponents观点是在第三段，但是原文和选项要怎么对照呢...怎么从观点看出态度？

王文静老师，我这道题目选了E，因为读起来感觉：a third of them作为elephants的修饰语，有一个with比较顺口也比较符合一般修饰语的语法，能麻烦您解释一下吗

问王文静老师，结合未画线部分C答案相当于用and并列了两个That从句修饰robe，且句子结构，动词时态也没有什么错误，代词they也有明确的指代，请问老师是哪里有问题？

老师请问一下，A答案为什么错？estimated 用来修饰fragments，A和D的区别就是介词 at 和 to 的区别 固定搭配？查了例句 estimate at 是正确的使用 被估计在 。。几百万年以前这个语意放在此句里 我感觉是合理的。

请问一下老师，关于这道题，我是根据 either ..or..绝对的平行做对的，但是在and并列的两个谓语 date 和 were fashioned的这个部分有点困惑。为什么不是date and are fashioned 或者说 dated and were fashioned。我认为这里是在讲述一个客观事实：这个神像可以追朔到什么时期和由什么制成，应该是用一般现在时。were fashioed 是过去式的被动语态对吧？date and were fashioned感觉也不复合并列的要求。

问MAY老师，两个“项目”的会用TT图解决，请问MAY老师像这种三个“项目”的题应该怎么解决？

问MAY老师 我用TT图解决不了这个问题，麻烦老师帮我看一下是哪里出了问题。

May老师，这是博智模考题里面的一道数学题，不理解呢

May老师你好，这道题的第三小题我的解题思路是插空法，但是做出来答案不对，请老师找找我的问题。因为题目说两端不能有女生，那我就让3个女生插在男生当中，5个男生6个空位，但要去掉一头一尾两个空位，就是C4选3*A33*A55（剩下5个男生随便排），请问老师我的思路上哪里错了？

麻烦老师帮我看看我哪里做错了

阴影区的这句话，中间的那个gives，是跟着前面哪个词的? 是哪个词发出的gives动作? 谢谢