老师您好能否帮我讲解下下面这个文章考试时该如何读，我读完这种文章压根不知道在说什么，只知道在讲ocean basin形成机制的几种理论。No very satisfactory account of the mechanism that caused the formation of the ocean basins has yet been given. The traditional view supposes that the upper mantle of the earth behaves as a liquid when it is subjected to small forces for long periods and that differences in temperature under oceans and continents are sufficient to produce convection in the mantle of the earth with rising convection currents under the mid-ocean ridges and sinking currents under the continents. Theoretically, this convection would carry the continental plates along as though they were on a conveyor belt (conveyor belt: n. 传送带) and would provide the forces needed to produce the split that occurs along the ridge. This view may be correct: it has the advantage that the currents are driven by temperature differences that themselves depend on the position of the continents. Such a back-coupling, in which the position of the moving plate has an impact on the forces that move it, could produce complicated and varying motions. On the other hand, the theory is implausible because convection does not normally occur along lines, and it certainly does not occur along lines broken by frequent offsets (an abrupt bend in an object by which one part is turned aside out of line) or changes in direction, as the ridge is. Also it is difficult to see how the theory applies to the plate between the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and the ridge in the Indian Ocean. This plate is growing on both sides, and since there is no intermediate trench, the two ridges must be moving apart. It would be odd if the rising convection currents kept exact pace with them. An alternative theory is that the sinking part of the plate, which is denser than the hotter surrounding mantle, pulls the rest of the plate after it. Again it is difficult to see how this applies to the ridge in the South Atlantic, where neither the African nor the American plate has a sinking part. Another possibility is that the sinking plate cools the neighboring mantle and produces convection currents that move the plates. This last theory is attractive because it gives some hope of explaining the enclosed seas, such as the Sea of Japan. These seas have a typical oceanic floor, except that the floor is overlaid by several kilometers of sediment. Their floors have probably been sinking for long periods. It seems possible that a sinking current of cooled mantle material on the upper side of the plate might be the cause of such deep basins. The enclosed seas are an important feature of the earth’s surface, and seriously require explanation because, in addition to the enclosed seas that are developing at present behind island arcs, there are a number of older ones of possibly similar origin, such as the Gulf of Mexico, the Black Sea, and perhaps the North Sea.

想请问下May老师，这道题怎么做出答案C？

请陆老师回答一下这一题为什么选B。我选了E。

请陆老师回答一下。这一题我错选了B。取yes，就是收入来自于commuter的是有季节性波动的。意思不就是旅游旺季，人多拥挤，commuter就会到港口来坐ferry，旅游淡季，人少，commuter就还是toll road不会来港口，支持原文；取no，就是没有季节性波动，说明无论是旅游旺季还是淡季，拥不拥挤，搭乘不搭乘ferry都不会影响commuter来不来这里吃饭，驳斥原文。 而C选项说的是港口吸不吸引tourist，但是原文argument说的是通过将commuter直接带到港口来增加收入，这和tourist有什么关系呢？感谢老师解答。

请陆老师回答一下。这一题我选了A，为什么正确答案是E。我首先判断第一句话是pre-evidence，第二句话是counter argument，第三句话的黑体字是conclusion，后半句是premise。 我觉得因为第一个黑体字是“all automobile dealers…”也是属于数据的，第二句话反驳了critics的观点。所以选了A。

请慧雯老师回答一下这一题为什么选C，A选项中as也有因为的意思 ，麻烦您分析一下其他选项。感谢解答！

请慧雯老师回答一下这一题为什么选B，我选了D。为什么需要用完成时态和被动形式以及为啥要加一个since呢？感谢解答！

请张慧雯老师回答一下这篇阅读的两题。 第一题，我定位到第二段（因为整个就是the first explanation”）。但是后面看到选项BCD好像还要定位到第四段“in 1840, about… was rough the same”这两个地方。但是我不知道精准定位是在哪里。然后还是不太懂这篇文章的意思，以及这一题为什么选C。 第二题，看到题干就觉得好难定位，通篇好像都要读，没办法快速根据题干来定位，结果还错选了A。请老师解答一下这一题的突破点以及为啥选D。

请王文静老师回答一下。请问一下这一题为什么选B。我选了E是因为前面说科学家猜测黄蜂被这种气味所吸引，但是后面说in this study，只有grassy odors释放出来了，说明这种气味肯定与grassy odors这种气味不一样。而B说这种气味没有grassy scent，但是原文又说科学家猜测黄蜂是被an odor，reminiscent of cut grass，that is released as the catepillar feeds，意思不就是这种气味类似于cut grass吗？那为什么还会选B。

请张慧雯老师回答一下。这一题为什么不选D，形容词修饰的动词一般不是系动词吗？为啥这一题会选E。感谢回答！

请陆旭老师回答一下。图片中的这一题为什么不可以选C，我的理解是这个研究是30年前做的，所以不适用于当今的情况，不具备说服力。