zoezhuyan wrote:
dear
AndrewN, and
GMATNinja,
GMATNinjaTwo,
I haven't gotten the solid cross off reasoning. most say "
it" in D and E are wrong, but however, I am afraid I disagree with them. "
it" in D and E like a "it" in "it is raining". why I crossed off D and E just because of indirect expression, compared with C. but I don't think it is a solid reasoning.
would you please clarify the solid reasoning to cross off D and E?
thanks in advance.
Yeah, you've got a point. The "it" might be
unnecessary, but can you make an argument that it's a dummy pronoun that works just fine? For example, if I say "it is likely that Tim will set the house aflame tonight", the "it" just indicates a general state of affairs. In the current question, it's probably fair game to argue that the "it" isn't a definitive error by itself.
But both (D) and (E) have this awful construction in the second part of the comparison: "
they are likely to receive it from
them." If you read each option several times, you can eventually figure out that "they" is the retirees and "them" is the children, but it's hard to imagine a more confusing way of conveying this information.
Also, the comparisons in (D) and (E) are odd. In each case, we're comparing the infinitive action, "to give" with the clunky full clause "they are likely to receive." Why not just go for the simpler, more logical comparison of actions?
This is exactly what we get in (C) in which it's clearly the retirees who are more likely "to give... than to receive."
Between the unnecessary "it," the confusing "they... them" clause, and the illogical comparison, there's no reason to agonize about whether the goofiness in (D) and (E) qualify as definitive grammatical errors. (C) is obviously better and more logical. That's good enough.
I hope that helps!