【문제】

이 중 문법적으로 오류가 있는 문장만을 모두 고른 것으로 가장 적절한 것은?

(문맥상의 부자연스러움이 아니라 형식 문법 기준에 따른다.)





(1)



The committee’s conclusion, which was derived from a dataset that had been curated over more than a decade and that was subsequently re-analyzed under stricter assumptions, was regarded as methodologically robust by external reviewers.



(2)



The hypothesis that the authors proposed, which they claimed to be not only theoretically motivated but also empirically testable, were later criticized on the grounds of conceptual overreach.



(3)



The incident, which had been considered a trivial anomaly until additional evidence was disclosed, and which was then re-framed as a potential systemic threat, prompted the agency to revise its internal protocols.



(4)



The framework to which the paper implicitly appeals, and which the reviewers assumed was already established in prior literature, appears to function as a concealed premise for the central inference.



(5)



The archival material that the authors relied upon, which had already been digitized and cross-validated by two independent institutions, were deemed sufficiently authentic for citation.



(6)



The policy, which was drafted in a manner that intentionally avoided explicit normative commitments while still presupposing a controversial ethical stance, has been interpreted as a form of strategic ambiguity.



(7)



The result, which would not have emerged had the boundary conditions been even marginally altered and which therefore depends on a rather delicate configuration, undermines the claim of structural invariance.



(8)



The reasoning that the director endorsed, and which the advisory board tacitly adopted despite several unresolved counter-examples, were later defended as pragmatically necessary rather than logically sound.



(9)



The archival correspondence to which the author repeatedly alludes — and which contradicts the narrative that has been publicly circulated for years — was deliberately excluded from the final report.



(10)



The interpretation that has been disseminated through secondary literature, which presents the disputed data as though it were conclusively adjudicated, obscures the epistemic status of the claim.





【선지】



① (2), (5)

② (3), (8)

③ (2), (5), (8)

④ (1), (5), (8)

⑤ (2), (5), (7), (8)





답은 아래에 있다 난이도 평가좀 해줘라