Although some officials noted that using machines for farming in China

(A) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while the previous year’s costs were cut in half
(B) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while cutting costs to half those of the previous year
(C) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield as cost were cut to half of the previous year’s
(D) farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield as it cut in half the previous year’s costs
(E) farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while costs were cut to half that of the previous year

Answer B

Let me try...

A and D are using wrong "cut in half" wrong construction so they are out.
C is using "cost were" so it is out (subject/verb)
E is using "that of the previous year" for referring to "costs" it should be "those of the previous year"
We are left with B, which don't have any of the above issue


Hope this helps.

I don't quite understand what you mean by A and D are out because of "previous year's costs". There is nothing wrong with using previous year's costs.

(A) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while the previous year’s costs were cut in half
The problem in A is with doubled and were. They are not parallel after the marker "while"

(B) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while cutting costs to half those of the previous year
CORRECT.

(C) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield as cost were cut to half of the previous year’s
The problem in C is the change in meaning. The sentence uses "as" which is a comparator and not really a time indicator. In the original sentence, while was used to indicate the timeframe of occurence of events which is eliminated in this sentence.

(D) farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield as it cut in half the previous year’s costs
Same problem as C.

(E) farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while costs were cut to half that of the previous year
Same problem as A. X while Y the verbs should be parallel. Doubled while cutting is more parallel than doubled while costs. In the latter we are comparing doubled (a participle) with costs (a noun)

I`m stronger on quant than I am on verbal, but see my comments in red below for my take on it. (B) is the only sentence that does not require correction.

(A) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while the previous year’s costs were cut to half
(B) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while cutting costs to half those of the previous year
(C) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while costs were cut to half of the previous year’s
(D) farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while it cut in half the previous year’s costs (bad sentence structure)
(E) farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while costs were cut to half those of the previous year

Another note is that "as" creates dependency. The cost is not dependent on the yield, it is dependent on the mechanization of farming.

kudos for that! Could you also explain something else to me please? I know that 'mechanization of farming ...' is a complete sentence and it is connected the subordinate clause 'while cutting costs...'. What I want to know is what kind of phrase 'cutting costs...' is? Do I just take it for fact that it is just a correct way to say what it was intended in English? Thanks!

A) This choice is incorrect for the same reason cited in Choice E

B) Correct and concise choice.

C) S-V disagreement cost …were. This choice also wrong because it changes intended meaning. We know there are two consequences of mechanization 1. it doubled the corn yield. 2. cut the costs to half. Wrong use of as changes the intended meaning and implies that mechanization doubled the corn yield because decrease in costs, while the intended meaning is mechanization doubled corn yield without increase in costs.

D) This choice is also wrong for the same reasons cited in Choice C

E) Here is parallelism error. Two consequences of single action should be in a form x has done y while doing z. The passive structure costs were cut…. is not parallel to doubled the corn yield. In this choice costs……that of is also wrong. It should be costs ....those of.

Regards,

Abhijit

chetan2u
sayantanc2k

In the above question , Choice E
"farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while costs were cut to half that of the previous year"
Although choice E is wrong for other reasons, my particular doubt is in costs were cut to half that of the previous year
can "that" be used to refer to a noun plural?will it be considered right?

I too had this query for a long time. Finally I discovered numerous instances in OG13 itself where "that" has been used to refer to plural antecedent. Therefore, we can safely say that in GMAT, "that" can refer to plural antecedent.

95. Although some officials noted that using machines for farming in China costs more than traditional hand cultivation, the mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while the previous year’s costs were cut in half.


(A) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while the previous year’s costs were cut in half -- how can an action of present affect the cost of the past ? Logicaly incorrect.
(B) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while cutting costs to half those of the previous year- No Mistake here , meaning is crisp , grammar is perfect.
(C) mechanization of farming in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield as cost were cut to half of the previous year’sas cost were? cost is singular
(D) farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield as it cut in half the previous year’s costs what does it refer to?
(E) farming mechanization in the village of Long Bow doubled the corn yield while costs were cut to half that of the previous year-- costs is plural so it needs a plural referant those

I am afraid that this topic is suspect in terms of logic.
1. The first part says that mechanized farming costs more than traditional farming. In the next breath, it says costs have reduced to half by mechanization.
This year, If mechanization cost me 150 fifty rupees, some 50 rupees more than the 100 rupees that I spend for traditional method, the cost goes up but not cut by half.
Let us not confuse the cost of cultivation with yield. Corn yield doubled means, the grain yield went up from, say, some 100 kegs to 200 kgs. However, It does not automatically mean that the costs were cut to half.
Nor can we say that the eventual effective cost this year is half of the original cost, due to the doubled yield. This will happen only when the absolute cost remains the same as that of the traditional method. But, mechanization has increased the absolute cost, the topic says in the first part.
This topic does not seem to convey ant sensible meaning because all the choices say that the costs were cut to half.

Would choice E be correct if that were replaced with those ?

GMATNinja VeritasKarishma

why option A is wrong

Previous year's costs were not cut in half. This year's costs were cut in half. Option (A) implies that some technique cut the costs in half last year.

VeritasKarishma
So it meant to say that what was last year cost is cut into half for example last year 100$
This year it's 50$

But what A was saying that it cut last year cost which is wrong

AM I right

Posted from my mobile device

I have an issue with B). Is it really correct to say "half those of the previous year". Shouldnt it be "half OF those of the previous year"?

Posted from my mobile device

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.