Dirt roads may evoke the bucolic simplicity of another century, but fi

This is all about being supremely literal with comparisons, as we'll discuss in this week’s YouTube webinar. And I don't think that anybody really loves comparisons, so… I dunno, try to enjoy this one anyway.


This is literally saying that dirt roads themselves cost more than maintaining paved roads. That doesn’t work: we either need to compare “maintaining dirt roads” to “maintaining paved roads” or we can compare the two types of roads. But (A) makes no sense in its current form.


This sounds pretty good! The key here is that the word “do” can replace a verb phrase – and in this case, “do” replaces “cost… to maintain.” So this is saying that “dirt roads cost twice as much to maintain as paved roads [cost to maintain].” Great, that makes sense. Let’s keep (B).


This is lamentably subtle. Keep in mind that “do” replaces a verb phrase – and “maintaining” is a noun (gerund) in this case, and definitely not a verb. (For more on –ing words, check out this article: https://gmatclub.com/forum/experts-topi ... 39780.html.) So this is literally saying that “maintaining dirt roads costs twice as much as paved roads [cost].” Now we’re comparing the cost of maintaining dirt roads with the cost of paved roads themselves, and that doesn’t makes sense.

Tricky, but definitely wrong. (C) is gone.


The “it” jumps out at me here. If we’re being charitable, I suppose we could accept the idea that “it” refers back to “maintaining”, since “maintaining” is a noun. So we have “maintaining dirt roads costs twice as much as [maintaining] does for paved roads.” Really? I guess that’s not totally illogical, but it’s a muddy mess, and it’s a whole lot less clear than (B). So (D) is out, since (B) is undoubtedly clearer.


I don’t see any reason why we would use the infinitive “to maintain” as a noun here. That’s not something that you’ll see very often in correct answers on the GMAT. I’m not 100% certain that it’s absolutely wrong, but it’s definitely inferior to (B).

Just as importantly, if we’re going to use the infinitive “to maintain” as the subject of the clause, then it’s only going to makes sense if the comparison is parallel. Something like “to maintain dirt roads costs twice as much as to maintain paved roads” would at least be parallel. (E) in its current form doesn’t make any sense, since “to maintain dirt roads” is compared with just the prepositional phrase “for paved roads.”

So (B) is our winner.