According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr

GMATNinja

Thanks for your reply.

Both in option B & In the example you gave "I have a smaller house than my neighbor has." Can i say that the "than" creates a parallelism effect & hence the fat/house is implied on the other side?

Also is this an elliptical clause.

Sure. Because "than" indicates a comparison, and we want to compare like elements, it's fair to think of "than" as a type of parallel marker.

"Ellipsis" is just a fancy term to refer to words in a sentence that are implied rather than stated outright. If I write, "My cat is more depressed than my neighbor's," the word "cat" is implied after "neighbor's." I wouldn't waste any brain space obsessing about ellipsis, though. I have never thought "hm, is this an instance of an ellipsis?" while taking an actual GMAT exam. Instead, my energy is focused on making sure that the sentence is clear and logical.

In the silly example I gave in the previous post, it's clear that we're comparing what I have to what my neighbor has, and that I'm comparing the size of our respective homes. Whether we label it as an "ellipsis" doesn't matter much, as long as you understand the logic of the comparison exactly as it's written.

I hope that helps!

Hello Everyone!

This is a great example of a GMAT question that includes a comparison! Let's start off by looking at the original question and highlighting any major differences between the options in orange:

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is good for cardiac health.

(A) wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is
(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be
(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be
(D) total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be
(E) total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is

After looking over the options quickly, a few key differences pop out:

1. starting off the comparison with "wild animals" vs. "total fat" (meaning/clarity)
2. than do livestock / than livestock / than that of livestock (parallelism)
3. more of a kind of fat / more fat of a kind (meaning/clarity)
4. pronouns toward the end = make sure they're clear

Since we know we're dealing with a comparison question, let's start by checking that the comparisons are parallel. This is the basic format they should follow:

X less than Y

Let's save the ones that are parallel for later, and rule out the ones that aren't:

(A) wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is --> PARALLEL

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be --> PARALLEL

(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be --> NOT PARALLEL (Comparing wild animals to "that of" livestock; what is "that of" referring to? We don't know, but we do know it's not parallel.)

(D) total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be --> NOT PARALLEL (Compares "total fat" to "livestock," which are not parallel things.)

(E) total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is --> NOT PARALLEL (Compares wild animals to "that of" livestock, which isn't parallel.)

We can eliminate options C, D, & E because the comparisons made were not parallel.

Now that we have this narrowed down to 2 options, let's take a closer look at each to find any potential problems:

(A) wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is

This is INCORRECT because it has a vague pronoun! Who/what is "they" referring to? It's not clear at all! This is a great example of the "Mysterious they." The sentence never refers to WHO conducted the studies mentioned in the beginning - in fact, there are no people in this sentence at all! So let's toss this option out.

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

This is CORRECT! The comparison is parallel, and there are no problems with vague or misleading pronouns!


There you have it - option B is the correct choice!


Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.

A. wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is

what i want to know is "wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain" - is this part correct grammatically ?

What is the rule for "do" ? where should it be used ?

Hi nlx23, do in option A correctly substitutes for have.

Note that do, does and did are all forms of the verb to do. These forms of to do verbs are very flexible; they can stand for the main verb in the sentence.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses to do verbs, their application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.

can anyone explain this?

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock (have) fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be


more of a kind of fat VS more fat of a kind
Do both carry different meaning?

I read this as,
more of a kind of fat = more of a type of fat thought to be good for cardiac health.
[ more fat of a kind = more fat of a type thought to be good for cardiac health.

As described in our rambling guide to the word “that”, “that” is a singular pronoun in this type of situation. In (C), I guess it has to refer to “total fat,” but that doesn’t really make sense: “wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock fed on grain…”
the most straightforward issue.

Please help me explain this question...
why the comparison in C is wrong? wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock. this compares the total fat of both animals. on Contrary, B compares total fat with the number of livestock.
comparison in B looks illogical whereas in C looks correct.

Dear GMATNinja,

Thanks for detailed explanation.

"Dear Team,
I have a doubt in option B. Comparison is done between ""wild animals have less total fat"" and ""livestock"" which is illogical. It should be ""livestock's "". Kindly suggest

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be good for cardiac health.

Thanks in advance

bb generis

GMATNinja VeritasKarishma

I struck off B as it had a passive voice construction. Where am i going wrong in thinking that "passive construction is almost always wrong on GMAT". I reasoned that since we do not know here who does the thinking in "kind of thought to be", hence (B) can't be the right answer choice.

Passive voice is not wrong. In writing, active voice is preferred over passive voice but passive voice has its uses (when the impact of the action is more important than the doer of the action) e.g.
"The tattoo was removed."
instead of "The doctor removed the tattoo."

You don't care who removed the tattoo. The important thing is that it was removed.

You cannot ignore an option just because it uses passive voice.

Hi,

I am having trouble in identifying what are being compared especially in D.
D states that "total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed of grain"---> Doesnt this mean that total fat of wild animals is less than total fat of livestock.

Hello krishnabalu!

In option D, it is comparing fat to animals, which isn't parallel. An easy way to check for this is to eliminate any prepositional phrases you can find. Prepositional phrases are there to add extra information - but they can also confuse readers! Here is what it looks like if we cross them out:

total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed of grain

If we eliminate the extra information, we can clearly see that this option is trying to compare total fat to livestock, which is NOT parallel! It should compare fat to fat, or animal to animal.

If we look at the correct option, we see a parallel comparison:

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain

This option is comparing animals to animals, which is parallel. The basis for comparison is their total fat, which is clearly indicated here.

I hope this helps!

I think your interpretation is spot on here. Nice job!



The issue stems from the use of the verb "have". If we wanted to compare the total fat of one animal to the total fat of another animal, we would say something like, "the total fat of wild animals IS less than the total fat of livestock fed on grain."

Consider the following examples:

• "I have less wine than you (have)." - The second "have" is implied. This sentence clearly communicates that the amount of wine that I have is less than the amount of wine that you have. This is analogous to choice (B): "wild animals have less total fat than livestock (have)."
• "I have less wine than your wine (has?)." - This one doesn't make sense. Your wine doesn't HAVE some amount of wine. YOU have some amount of wine. This is analogous to choice (C): "wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock fed on grain".

The total fat of livestock fed on grain does not have some amount of total fat. The livestock has some amount of total fat. So we want to say that "wild animals HAVE less total fat than livestock (have)." And that's why (B) makes more sense than (C).

I hope this helps!

Dear GMATNinja,

What about "wild animals' total fat is less than THAT OF domestic animals", would it then be correct? Would you please point out the differences in the structure of these two sentences that command different use of "that of"? Thanks!

Hello shabuzen102,

Although your question is not directed to me, here is my answer to your question.


Firstly, yes, wild animals' total fat is less than THAT OF domestic animals, this structure presents correct comparison between the total fat of the two animals. Now, let's understand why the usage of that of livestock in Choice C is incorrect.


Choice C says wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock. According to this statement. Wild animals have less total fat. That of livestock has more total fat. Does the second statement make sense? No, right? What is this that of livestock that has more total fat? We do not know. The sentence does not say anything about that. From the context of the sentence, we understand that the sentence intends to say that wild animals have less total fat. Livestock has more total fat. The comparison is between wild animals and livestock on the basis of the total fat that they contain. Hence, in the phrase that of livestock, that cannot refer to anything logical in the sentence.

But in the statement wild animals' total fat is less than that of livestock, we are saying wild animal's total fat is less. That (total fat) of livestock is more. Hence, the phrasing works.


Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi,
OG732 OA E is using that of XXX. The same structure as this question in C. So why that of XX in C is incorrect.

OG732 OA E
Laos has a land area about the same as Great Britain but only 4 million in population, where many are members of hill tribes ensconced in the virtually inaccessible mountain valleys of the north.
E. comparable to that of Great Britain but a population of only 4 million people, many of whom

C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more
fat of a kind thought to be

First of all, comparing sentences from different problems is rarely productive (for more on that, check out the rant in this post). Just because a construction works in one correct answer choice doesn't mean that construction is always correct. And just because a construction doesn't work in an incorrect answer choice doesn't mean that it's always wrong. This problem and OG732 are entirely different (wild?) animals.

In choice (C), "that of" seems to refer to "total fat". That leaves us with “wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock fed on grain…” As explained here, that doesn't make much sense.

Meanwhile, in choice (E) of OG732, "that of" refers to "land area. That gives us, "Laos has a land area comparable to the land area Great Britain..." This comparison makes perfect sense.

For more on the use of "that" in GMAT SC, check out this article or this video.

I hope this helps!