Analytics firms report that global Internet usage through mobile

What is the difference between A and B?

Hi Chetan,

Doesn't placement of nearly ahead of doubling in B has any effect.
without nearly also doubling has the same effect.
Whats the significance of nearly here.
Please shed some light here

Explanation:

Twice vs. double vs. doubling (global internet usage cannot be twice the 2011 figure) “Double” can refer either to “internet usage” or to the year 2012... “Doubling”correctly shows cause and effect.

Analytics firms report that global Internet usage through mobile devices rose to 8.5 percent in 2012, nearly twice the 2011 figure of 4.3 percent.

nearly twice the 2011 figure of 4.3 percent
nearly doubling the 2011 figure of 4.3 percent
nearly doubling 2011’s 4.3 percent
nearly double that of 2011’s 4.3 percent
almost double the 2011 figure of 4.3 percent

experts .....pls explain the use of ..

nearly twice
nearly doubling
almost double

I am no expert just up the learning curve. But I got the right answer simply by reading for meaning.

1. Analytics firms report that global Internet usage through mobile devices rose to 8.5 percent in 2012, nearly twice the 2011 figure of 4.3 percent - rose to X nearly twice ... does not make sense. We are looking for a comparative inference / modifier.
2. Analytics firms report that global Internet usage through mobile devices rose to 8.5 percent in 2012,nearly doubling the 2011 figure of 4.3 percent - This is correct as the phrase after comma modifies the rise in usage correctly.
3. Analytics firms report that global Internet usage through mobile devices rose to 8.5 percent in 2012,nearly doubling 2011’s 4.3 percent - 2011's what is 4.3? Incorrect construction.
4. Analytics firms report that global Internet usage through mobile devices rose to 8.5 percent in 2012,nearly double that of 2011’s 4.3 percent - 2 errors here. It does not modify the rise in price merely compares the figures which is incorrect. Also 2011's is not correct in my view.
5. Analytics firms report that global Internet usage through mobile devices rose to 8.5 percent in 2012, almost double the 2011 figure of 4.3 percent - Incorrectly modifies the action of rise in percent by merely modifying the 8.5 percent.

In this we have a choice between Twice vs. double vs. doubling (global internet usage cannot be twice the 2011 figure) “Double” can refer either to “internet usage” or to the year 2012... “Doubling”correctly shows cause and effect. Hence correct answer should be B.


----------------
Please consider giving kudos if you like this post

Hi chetan2u,
Can you please explain use of twice and double.
Thanks

According to the National Science Foundation, in 2003 there were 198,113 female science and engineering graduate students, almost 42% of the graduate students in those fields, twice as much as 1981.
a. twice as much as 1981
b. twice as many as 1981
c. double the figure for 1981
d. double what it was in 1981
e. a number double that of 1981’s
hi the correct answer for the question above is C. Why here "double" doesn't modify "fields"? thanks!

AryamaDuttaSaikia

Its clearly between B and C,but I can't find out any grammatical error in C.Though C sounds a little awkward.Can anyone point out what is grammatically wrong in C?

Same here, Even am confused what is wrong with C. More over isn't figure in B redundant ?

The vulnerable part in B is the foul on prepositional parallelism; you have something in 2012, a prepositional phrase, and for the sake of effective parallelism, you must compare the same with another prepositional phrase in 2011. The use of a noun phrase such as "the 2011 figure of 4.3 percent" rather than a prepositional phrase is not only unparallel in B but also no less ugly than 2011’s 4.3 percent in C.

A – Modifier error. ‘nearly twice the …’ is modifying 2012. This obviously makes no sense at all. D and E both have the exact same problem too, so that’s three options out. C is correct but also kind of awkward. ‘doubling 2011’s 4.3 percent sounds strange’. B is the best choice.

I have a doubt: B is the stated OA
but phrases such as "GI usage...rose...xxxx, nearly Doubl-ing......." can be used when the Verb-ing is modifying the verb as well as the doer of the verb. GI usage cannot be the doer? There has to be an active doer.

While Answer E seems the next best: But 'of 4.3%' seems redundant
Can somebody please help?

this is special pattern. the phrase after comma can be an adjective modifying the preceding clause or an adverb modify the main clause.
but in this problem, adjective phrase after comma can not work because "in 2012" is adverb. this make adjective phrase after comma is not legal because adjective phrase must modify a preceding noun or preceding noun phrase. the noun phrase is noun+modifier of this noun. if there is an adverb such as "in 2012", adjective phrase can not jump over this phrase to modify the noun standing before the adverb.

this is not official question and the above rule is not valid because there is official answer, in which "which clause" can jump over short verb phrase to modify the subject.

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.