Great explanations Tommy, I could almost hear you there.. Also nite that you left 1% open in your answer for "probability" :)
But what I wrong with "twice as high"? Twice as tall sounds better, but high also identifies a building characteristic...
I have another question in another thread on morelikelythan when you get a chance...
Thanks
TommyWallach wrote:
Hey Mainhoon,
One by one:
1. Is twice as much alright? Or should it be twice as high? : Well you can't say "much" in this sentence, if that's your question. But "high" kinda sucks, too (though it may be technically legal). The BEST way is not to use "likelihood" this way, and go with "twice as likely." In general, the word choice should be dependent on context, though the truth is I couldn't think of a context where "high" was a good choice, though I'm open to the possibility:
"I have twice as much money as Dave." --> see, no problem
"My skyscraper is twice as high as Dave's." --> this should say "twice as tall"
"My taxes are twice as high as Dave's." --> Possible, but awkward.
2. I assume your reasoning below equally applies to "probability" ..
Indeed, I'm 99% all my explanations here apply to probability as well.
3. I did not know you cannot "have a likelihood": Yep. There can "be a (significant) likelihood" of something, but you can't HAVE it.
4. Also in option C below if it ended in:
that their likelihood of getting osteoarthritis of the knee is twice as much as the likelihood that white women would get it? Does that make it any better in terms of comparison?
Nope. Your likelihood can't be twice as much. Also "their likelihood" doesn't make sense. You can't HAVE a likelihood, so the idea of using a possessive pronoun with "likelihood" makes very little sense.
Hope that helps!
-t
Posted from my mobile device