A large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should

i m still not sure why not option 'B'

Let me try to explain this to you..

10. A large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago.
(A) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago
(B) and make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago
(C) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago

If you analyse choice C, you can notice that the first part of the sentence (A large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars) seem to be a cause leading to the effect which is later part of the sentence ( making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago) , in short the answer choice C is the outcome of what has happened in the non underlined part. so , the second part of sentence ( answer choice ) is an outcome of the first part but not an purposefully intended outcome.

Whereas , if you see the choice B , the answer choice starts with AND , and this suggests that the first part of the sentence is done with an intention to achieve the objective (answer choice ) and the answer choice has to be an intended outcome not a natural outcome.

I know it's very thin line between both.. but if you actually read the same 2/3 times .. you will get the gist of it.

I could be wrong in my explanation.. .and if anyone feels my understanding is wrong.... i am open to suggestions.

(C)

(A) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago
(B) and make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago
(C) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago
(D) to make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago
(E) in making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it as five years ago

Can some one help me to understand the comparison why it is needed? Even without it meaning is properly conveyed.. can anyone point the two logical ways in which you can make the comparison?

The comparison is needed because the sentence is comparing the present health of the construction industry to what it was 5 years ago. usually comparison question have markers like :more then...X greater then y etc..you wil start to pick them as you practice more....
Now in comparison the most common type of error seen is the comparison of wrong things. Ex in this passage the economy is compared with time 5 years ago. that's not corrects you need to mention the subject to have the correct comparison . So, that's why A is incorrect.

A large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago.

In C you are comparing the economic healts with the economic health 5 years ago.
In A you are comparing the economic healts with 5 years ago.

(A) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago

(C) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it (economic health) was five years ago

It is because the parallelism between "should boost" and "and make" would not make any sense, as the first is referred to the rise in housing while what makes construction industry more robust is not the increase in housing per se but the resulting increase in dollar investment in construction industry. So choice B is out.

A large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year
should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars,
making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago.


(A) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago

(B) and make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago

(C) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago

(D) to make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago

(E) in making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it as five years ago

IMO C

Parallel structure issue.
Two things are wrongly compared.

mikemcgarry
Can you please help to explain, why option (A) is incorrect?

making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than (it was) five years ago.
Here it was is understood, by default.

First of all, option B is making a wrong comparison, it is comparing "economic health" with "5 years ago".
Secondly, there is a cause and effect relationship here which is best described by "making...".

I understand the explanations for the answers;I have problems with a different thing to understand. Please, help me to get the grammar of first part of the sentence.




Q1)Which is the main verb in this clause
Q2)Why it is Starts but not starting ?

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning of this sentence is key to solving this question; the intended meaning is that a large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, and as a result, make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Comparisons

• A comparison must always be made between similar things.
• The infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb"- "to + make" in this sentence) is the preferred construction for referring to the purpose or intent of an action.
• The introduction of the present participle ("verb+ing"- "making” in this case) after the comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship.

A:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly compares "the construction industry’s economic health" to "five years ago"; remember, a comparison must always be made between similar things.

B:
1/ This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "and make"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that a large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, and as a separate action, make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago; the intended meaning is that a large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, and as a result, make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago.
1/ Option B incorrectly compares "the construction industry’s economic health" to "five years ago"; remember, a comparison must always be made between similar things.

C: Correct.
1/ This answer choice uses the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "making" in this sentence) construction, conveying the intended meaning - that a large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, and as a result, make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago; remember, the introduction of present participle ("verb+ing"- "making” in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship.
2/ This answer choice correctly compares "the construction industry’s economic health" with what the construction industry's economic health was five years ago.

D:
1/ This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "to make"; the use of the infinitive verb form ("to + base form of verb" - "to + make" in this sentence) incorrectly implies that a large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, and in order to, make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago; the intended meaning is that a large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, and as a result, make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago; remember, the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb"- "to + make" in this sentence) is the preferred construction for referring to the purpose or intent of an action.
2/ Option D incorrectly compares "the construction industry’s economic health" to "five years ago"; remember, a comparison must always be made between similar things.

E:
1/ This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "in making"; the construction of this phrase reverses cause and effect, incorrectly implying that a large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars in the process of making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago; the intended meaning is that a large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, and as a result, make the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago.

Hence, C is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Comma Plus Present Participle for Cause-Effect Relationship" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):



To understand the concept of "Present Participle" versus "Infinitive Verb Form" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

gpt 4 answer

prompt : A large rise in the number of housing starts in the coming year should boost new construction dollars by several billion dollars, making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago.
C) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than it was five years ago
what is the problem if I choose'''
(A) making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than five years ago '''

Answer:

Hello, this is Bing. I can help you with your grammar question. 😊

The problem with choosing option A is that it is **ambiguous** and **illogical**. Let me explain why.

When you use a **comparative adjective** such as more robust, you need to use **than** to compare two things or people ¹². For example:

- She is older than me.
- France is bigger than England.
- He is a better player than Ronaldo.

However, in option A, you are comparing the construction industry’s economic health with five years ago, which is a **point in time**, not a thing or a person. This does not make sense. What you really want to compare is the construction industry’s economic health **now** with the construction industry’s economic health **five years ago**.

To do this, you need to use a **noun phrase** after than to specify what you are comparing. For example:

- making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than **it was** five years ago
- making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than **the level** five years ago
- making the construction industry’s economic health much more robust than **that of** five years ago

These options are all correct and clear. They show that you are comparing two states or levels of the construction industry’s economic health at different points in time.

Option C is one of these correct options, so it is the best answer for your question.