Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 03:27 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 03:27
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   
User avatar
shanks2020
User avatar
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Last visit: 21 Mar 2024
Posts: 239
Own Kudos:
39
 [1]
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 239
Kudos: 39
 [1]
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 12 Sep 2020, 11:32
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
daagh
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than in 1960.

(A) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than
(B) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute as
(C) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than it did
(D) and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did
(E) and wood now costs eight times as much as a result to collect and distribute than

The obvious entry point to this topic is through the idiom as much as. We have as much as, only in B and D. Choices A and C and E are corrupted with as much than or as much as than.

The problem with D seems to be that the wood is not doing anything to use the verb "did" in 1960. 'Costs' is used as linking verb in the context and per se, we would not require an action verb 'did' in the other part. It would be just enough to say 'in 1960' as in B.

In B, the adverbial modifier 'comma plus resulting' aptly modifies the previous clause - ten million acres have been lost --and brings out the impact of the abuse of the forests amply.

IMO, B.
Show more

Hi daagh,

since it comma plus verb-ing modifier, should not we be checking whether it makes sense with the subject(Ten million acres of forest)?
and since it doesn't make sense to associate with it, the sentence is wrong?
avatar
dp14695
avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2018
Last visit: 24 Sep 2020
Posts: 18
Own Kudos:
48
Given Kudos: 232
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Nonprofit
Schools: W.P. Carey '23
GPA: 3.77
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: W.P. Carey '23
Posts: 18
Kudos: 48
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 12 Sep 2020, 11:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shanks2020
daagh
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than in 1960.

(A) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than
(B) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute as
(C) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than it did
(D) and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did
(E) and wood now costs eight times as much as a result to collect and distribute than

The obvious entry point to this topic is through the idiom as much as. We have as much as, only in B and D. Choices A and C and E are corrupted with as much than or as much as than.

The problem with D seems to be that the wood is not doing anything to use the verb "did" in 1960. 'Costs' is used as linking verb in the context and per se, we would not require an action verb 'did' in the other part. It would be just enough to say 'in 1960' as in B.

In B, the adverbial modifier 'comma plus resulting' aptly modifies the previous clause - ten million acres have been lost --and brings out the impact of the abuse of the forests amply.

IMO, B.

Hi daagh,

since it comma plus verb-ing modifier, should not we be checking whether it makes sense with the subject(Ten million acres of forest)?
and since it doesn't make sense to associate with it, the sentence is wrong?
Show more

You are right, we have to check for doer of -ing modifer.
User avatar
shanks2020
User avatar
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Last visit: 21 Mar 2024
Posts: 239
Own Kudos:
39
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 239
Kudos: 39
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 12 Sep 2020, 12:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
dp14695
shanks2020
daagh
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than in 1960.

(A) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than
(B) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute as
(C) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than it did
(D) and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did
(E) and wood now costs eight times as much as a result to collect and distribute than

The obvious entry point to this topic is through the idiom as much as. We have as much as, only in B and D. Choices A and C and E are corrupted with as much than or as much as than.

The problem with D seems to be that the wood is not doing anything to use the verb "did" in 1960. 'Costs' is used as linking verb in the context and per se, we would not require an action verb 'did' in the other part. It would be just enough to say 'in 1960' as in B.

In B, the adverbial modifier 'comma plus resulting' aptly modifies the previous clause - ten million acres have been lost --and brings out the impact of the abuse of the forests amply.

IMO, B.

Hi daagh,

since it comma plus verb-ing modifier, should not we be checking whether it makes sense with the subject(Ten million acres of forest)?
and since it doesn't make sense to associate with it, the sentence is wrong?

You are right, we have to check for doer of -ing modifer.
Show more

Hi daagh AndrewN experts

Using this example, is it correct to say that passive voice clause can never be followed by commna + verb-ing modifier, if the does is not specified?
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 12 Sep 2020, 13:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shanks2020
dp14695
shanks2020
daagh
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than in 1960.

(A) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than
(B) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute as
(C) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than it did
(D) and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did
(E) and wood now costs eight times as much as a result to collect and distribute than

The obvious entry point to this topic is through the idiom as much as. We have as much as, only in B and D. Choices A and C and E are corrupted with as much than or as much as than.

The problem with D seems to be that the wood is not doing anything to use the verb "did" in 1960. 'Costs' is used as linking verb in the context and per se, we would not require an action verb 'did' in the other part. It would be just enough to say 'in 1960' as in B.

In B, the adverbial modifier 'comma plus resulting' aptly modifies the previous clause - ten million acres have been lost --and brings out the impact of the abuse of the forests amply.

IMO, B.

Hi daagh,

since it comma plus verb-ing modifier, should not we be checking whether it makes sense with the subject(Ten million acres of forest)?
and since it doesn't make sense to associate with it, the sentence is wrong?

You are right, we have to check for doer of -ing modifer.

Hi daagh AndrewN experts

Using this example, is it correct to say that passive voice clause can never be followed by commna + verb-ing modifier, if the does is not specified?
Show more
Watch that language, shanks2020. Absolute words—e.g., never, always, must—and the rules you may construct from them rarely stand up in all cases. As much as you can, you want to avoid looking to pigeonhole each grammatical consideration and instead adapt your working knowledge of concepts and general usage to the question at hand and the answer choices contained therein. Look for obvious errors first, and whittle away at what remains from there.

- Andrew
User avatar
shanks2020
User avatar
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Last visit: 21 Mar 2024
Posts: 239
Own Kudos:
39
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 239
Kudos: 39
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 12 Sep 2020, 22:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AndrewN
shanks2020
dp14695
shanks2020
daagh
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than in 1960.

(A) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than
(B) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute as
(C) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than it did
(D) and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did
(E) and wood now costs eight times as much as a result to collect and distribute than

The obvious entry point to this topic is through the idiom as much as. We have as much as, only in B and D. Choices A and C and E are corrupted with as much than or as much as than.

The problem with D seems to be that the wood is not doing anything to use the verb "did" in 1960. 'Costs' is used as linking verb in the context and per se, we would not require an action verb 'did' in the other part. It would be just enough to say 'in 1960' as in B.

In B, the adverbial modifier 'comma plus resulting' aptly modifies the previous clause - ten million acres have been lost --and brings out the impact of the abuse of the forests amply.

IMO, B.

Hi daagh,

since it comma plus verb-ing modifier, should not we be checking whether it makes sense with the subject(Ten million acres of forest)?
and since it doesn't make sense to associate with it, the sentence is wrong?

You are right, we have to check for doer of -ing modifer.

Hi daagh AndrewN experts

Using this example, is it correct to say that passive voice clause can never be followed by commna + verb-ing modifier, if the does is not specified?
Watch that language, shanks2020. Absolute words—e.g., never, always, must—and the rules you may construct from them rarely stand up in all cases. As much as you can, you want to avoid looking to pigeonhole each grammatical consideration and instead adapt your working knowledge of concepts and general usage to the question at hand and the answer choices contained therein. Look for obvious errors first, and whittle away at what remains from there.

- Andrew
Show more

Hi AndrewN

So is my reasoning correct that one of the reasons that options A/B/C could be wrong is lack of proper subject/doer for the comma verb-ing modifier - resulting? even though it does modify the preceding clause correctly.
Also can you please confirm whether "considering" in options D and E are acting as similar comma verb-ing modifier or they are just nouns after the preposition without, hence does not require any connection with the previous clause.
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 13 Sep 2020, 13:55
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shanks2020

Hi AndrewN

So is my reasoning correct that one of the reasons that options A/B/C could be wrong is lack of proper subject/doer for the comma verb-ing modifier - resulting? even though it does modify the preceding clause correctly.
Also can you please confirm whether "considering" in options D and E are acting as similar comma verb-ing modifier or they are just nouns after the preposition without, hence does not require any connection with the previous clause.
Show more
Hello, shanks2020. Choices (A), (B), and (C) can all be eliminated for the same error in the meaning conveyed by the -ing phrase. GMATNinja has done a fine job detailing that error in this earlier post. I hope that will satisfy your curiosity.

- Andrew
User avatar
Sumi1010
User avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2018
Last visit: 19 Jan 2025
Posts: 300
Own Kudos:
696
 [1]
Given Kudos: 20
Location: India
Posts: 300
Kudos: 696
 [1]
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 22 Oct 2020, 22:49
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This is an easy one if we eliminate the wrong choices.
The correct constructions are - as much X as (and not as much X than)
Eliminate A, C and E.

Rewriting B and D in full sentences.
(B) Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960,resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute as in 1960.
(D) Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960,and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did in 1960.
In B, it implies that - the result of the fact that ten million acres of forest have been lost is wood (followed by its modifier).This makes no sense.
Hence D is the only choice left to be correct.

I have two queries here :
1. Can we use Comma+verbING modifier if the previous clause does not mention the doer (subject), for instance, if the previous clause is in passive? (as in B here)

I believe the rule is - Comma+verbING should modify the closest action of the preceding clause, and the SUBJECT of the preceding clause should be the agent of the -ING action.

2. As " and" is considered parallel marker, can we use " and" to show the result of one clause as another ?

ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960,and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did in 1960.
If we remove "as a result" from the clause second clause,won't the parallel structure become nonsense?

GMATNinja egmat
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,782
 [5]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,782
 [5]
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 08 Dec 2020, 09:15
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
I have two queries here :
1. Can we use Comma+verbING modifier if the previous clause does not mention the doer (subject), for instance, if the previous clause is in passive? (as in B here)

I believe the rule is - Comma+verbING should modify the closest action of the preceding clause, and the SUBJECT of the preceding clause should be the agent of the -ING action.
Show more
Not a rule. As a framework for evaluating the logic of a CLAUSE + COMMA + -ING construction, asking whether it makes sense for the subject of the clause to have performed the action works most of the time, but there are definite exceptions. Consider an example:

    Tim's children were attacked by hungry squirrels, prompting his wife to insist that Tim stop coating them in peanut butter before releasing them into the wild.

This sentence is fine. The action described in one clause - the squirrel attack - resulted in the action in the next clause - the prohibition on covering kids in peanut butter.

But if you used the above framework, you'd see that the subject of the clause is "Tim's children." Are Tim's children really what prompted his wife to take action? Nope. It was the fact that they were attacked. So there's a risk that you'd conclude, incorrectly, that the construction doesn't work, when it's perfectly acceptable.

The takeaway: when you see CLAUSE + COMMA + -ING, simply ask yourself if the -ing modifier logically describes the previous clause.


Quote:
2. As " and" is considered parallel marker, can we use " and" to show the result of one clause as another ?

ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960,and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did in 1960.
If we remove "as a result" from the clause second clause,won't the parallel structure become nonsense?

GMATNinja egmat
Show more
"And" is a pretty flexible parallel marker. All it needs to do is connect two parts of a sentence that play the same role. For example:

    Tim slathered his children in peanut butter, and as a result, they were attacked by squirrels.

Here, "and" is connecting two independent clauses. Those clauses are structured slightly differently, but that's fine. Grammatically, they play the same role: the part in red can stand on its own as a complete sentence, and so can the part in blue.

I hope that clears things up a bit!
avatar
puneet1992
avatar
Joined: 06 Mar 2019
Last visit: 28 Mar 2022
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 205
Posts: 3
Kudos: 1
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 21 Jul 2021, 02:20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Quote:
Experts, could you please explain the official solution a lil more as to why exactly is B incorrect? I was stuck b/w B and D. I just couldn't point to an error in B. 'resulting' is actually modifying the previous whole clause right? Is the 'as much .. as in 1960' not correct in B? Please help. Thanks :)
Good question! The phrase "resulting in," because it contains a preposition, should introduce a noun or noun phrase that is a result. For example,

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, resulting in mass indigestion." --> What was the result of Tim's culinary negligence? Mass indigestion. Makes sense.

Now look at the relevant portion in (B):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood..."

The result of 10 million acres of forest disappearing was...wood? No. That's illogical. So (B) is out.

The phrase "as a result" will introduce a full clause. Again, poor beleaguered Tim will will help illustrate:

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, and as a result, everyone in town hates him." --> What was the result of Tim poisoning the neighborhood kids? The clause: everyone hates him. Of course they do.

This is the same usage we see in (D):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did."

What is the result of the 10 million acres of forest disappearing? It's the entire clause: wood now costs eight times as much as it used to. Makes perfect sense. Because (D) is logical and (B) is nonsense, (D) is our winner.

I hope that helps!
Show more


GMATNinja The way I thought about Option B was that the use of 'costs' in D is better than 'costing' B because 'costs' connotes a general fact which should be applicable here. Is that a right consideration ?
User avatar
centenarian
User avatar
Joined: 06 Nov 2020
Last visit: 16 Mar 2023
Posts: 5
Given Kudos: 45
Location: United States
Posts: 5
Kudos: 0
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 06 Aug 2021, 21:18
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja

Clearly the “wood” that was used in the 60’s is not the same as the one being used now. So, why are we using “it?”

Per your comment to question SC67561.01, we should not use “it” or “they” to refer to same type of things that happen in two different time periods. It/they are used to refer to the same things, not carbon copies.

If GMAT is creating questions that are not based on consistent rules, how are we supposed answer questions correctly each time?
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,782
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,782
 [1]
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 24 Aug 2021, 13:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
puneet1992
GMATNinja
Quote:
Experts, could you please explain the official solution a lil more as to why exactly is B incorrect? I was stuck b/w B and D. I just couldn't point to an error in B. 'resulting' is actually modifying the previous whole clause right? Is the 'as much .. as in 1960' not correct in B? Please help. Thanks :)
Good question! The phrase "resulting in," because it contains a preposition, should introduce a noun or noun phrase that is a result. For example,

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, resulting in mass indigestion." --> What was the result of Tim's culinary negligence? Mass indigestion. Makes sense.

Now look at the relevant portion in (B):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood..."

The result of 10 million acres of forest disappearing was...wood? No. That's illogical. So (B) is out.

The phrase "as a result" will introduce a full clause. Again, poor beleaguered Tim will will help illustrate:

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, and as a result, everyone in town hates him." --> What was the result of Tim poisoning the neighborhood kids? The clause: everyone hates him. Of course they do.

This is the same usage we see in (D):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did."

What is the result of the 10 million acres of forest disappearing? It's the entire clause: wood now costs eight times as much as it used to. Makes perfect sense. Because (D) is logical and (B) is nonsense, (D) is our winner.

I hope that helps!


GMATNinja The way I thought about Option B was that the use of 'costs' in D is better than 'costing' B because 'costs' connotes a general fact which should be applicable here. Is that a right consideration ?
Show more
Yup, I think that's another valid point, one that fits with our previous explanation:

GMATNinja
... The result of 10 million acres of forest disappearing was...wood? No. That's illogical.
{...}
What is the result of the 10 million acres of forest disappearing? It's the entire clause: wood now costs eight times as much as it used to.
Show more
In (D), the "result" is that "wood now costs eight times as much as it used to". In (B), it sounds like the result is just "wood" -- wood that happens to now cost eight times as much as it used to.

In other words, because "costing" is a modifier in (B), it's less clear whether the "costing" part IS the result or just some additional information about the wood. But in (D), it's clear that the result is not just "wood" -- it's the fact that wood now costs eight times as much as it used to.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,782
 [3]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,782
 [3]
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 24 Aug 2021, 13:54
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
centenarian
GMATNinja

Clearly the “wood” that was used in the 60’s is not the same as the one being used now. So, why are we using “it?”

Per your comment to question SC67561.01, we should not use “it” or “they” to refer to same type of things that happen in two different time periods. It/they are used to refer to the same things, not carbon copies.

If GMAT is creating questions that are not based on consistent rules, how are we supposed answer questions correctly each time?
Show more
Unfortunately, GMAT SC isn't meant to be a test of black and white grammar rules -- it's about subtle meaning and logic issues that can't be distilled down to a list of mechanical decision points. That's what makes it so hard!

On the GMAT, your job is to select the BEST answer choice out of the five available options, and that's why comparing sentences from different problems is rarely productive. Looking at a single sentence in a bubble and trying to determine whether it's correct or incorrect based on grammar "rules" is an entirely different job -- one that you'll never have to do on this test!

This question and the avalanche question (SC67561.01) are entirely different animals. But before we dive in, let's look at a couple of examples:

  • "Electricity costs more in Chile than it does in the United States." - This makes perfect sense: we are referring to electricity in general and saying that it costs more in one place than in another.
  • "Electricity in Chile costs more than it does in the United States." - This one isn't great. Now it seems like the "it" is referring to "electricity in Chile" -- so "electricity in Chile" costs more than "electricity in Chile" costs in the United States?? That doesn't make any sense. Sure, you can guess what this sentence is trying to say. But as written, it suggests an illogical meaning. Is this wrong because it breaks some ironclad rule? No. But the first one is much better because it expresses the logical meaning more clearly.

The correct answer in the avalanche question is much like the second example above, while choice (A) is more like the first example above:

Quote:
(E) Avalanches at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park killed more than 200 people between 1885 and 1910, but such avalanches are now controlled if not prevented; cannons are fired at the slopes to make snow masses fall before they become dangerous.
Show more
Because we have such avalanches, it's clear that we are NOT talking about the avalanches that already happened. Instead, we are talking about hypothetical avalanches LIKE the ones that already happened, and that makes perfect sense.

Here's (A):
Quote:
(A) Avalanches at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park killed more than 200 people between 1885 and 1910, but they are now controlled if not prevented; cannons are fired at the slopes to make snow masses fall before they become dangerous.
Show more
Here the pronoun "they" makes it sound like we are in fact referring to the specific "avalanches at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park killed more than 200 people between 1885 and 1910," not just hypothetical avalanches. That doesn't make sense -- of course you cannot prevent an avalanche that already happened (unless you have all six Infinity Stones?). So (E) is the better choice.

Back to the current thread. Choice (D) in this question ("Because 70 percent...") is more like the first example above. We are referring to wood (the fuel/resource) in a GENERAL way and then saying that this fuel/resource costs more now than it did before. This is perfectly logical, so (D) is okay.

In general, GMAT SC shouldn't be about memorizing what you saw on other questions and trying to apply that stuff to new questions. Instead, you have to think really hard about meaning in each new question and determine which choice is best. I know: not much fun. :tongue_opt3

I hope that helps!
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 18 Nov 2021, 09:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Going back to the original sentence – here is my analysis on the comparisons (I have cancelled out useless modifiers)
Quote:

(option A) ten million acres of forest have been lost, resulting in wood {now costing eight times as much than (wood costing) in 1960}
(Option B) ten million acres of forest have been lost, resulting in wood {now costing eight times as much as (wood costing) in 1960}
Show more

Resulting in wood is obviously wrong

Is the comparison in the parenthesis wrong though ? I think it sounds okay but i think the comparison is wrong because this way, we are comparing wood to wood (costing is a present participle adjective)

The intention is to compare cost to cost

Cost has to be a verb. Cost cannot be a present participle adjective

Quote:

Option C) ten million acres of forest have been lost, resulting in wood {now costing eight times as much as it did in 1960}
Show more

Resulting in wood is obviously wrong

Is the comparison wrong ? The comparison is wrong beacuse on the Right hand side, there is a clause (it did) whereas on the Left hand side, there is a noun only (wood costing)
ii) also there is no verb for "did" to refer back too. 'Costing' is an adjective. "Did" should refer back to an actual verb

Quote:
Option E) ten million acres of forest have been lost and wood now costs eight times as much than (wood costs) in 1960
Show more

- The comparison is wrong beacuse of the ellipsis. The ellipsis forces the usage of present tense "Wood Costs" in the brackets as shown above in option E.
- We need the usage of past tense instead in the brackets (the brackets should be wood cost and NOT wood costs)
User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
1,930
 [1]
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
 [1]
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 18 Nov 2021, 11:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
That's a great analysis, jabhatta2, well done!
jabhatta2

ten million acres of forest have been lost and wood now costs eight times as much than (wood costs) in 1960

- The comparison is wrong beacuse of the ellipsis. The ellipsis forces the usage of present tense "Wood Costs" in the brackets as shown above in option E.
- We need the usage of past tense instead in the brackets (the brackets should be wood cost and NOT wood costs)
Show more
I would just add these two important issues with answer choice E:

[*]"and" hides the causality (the third clause is the result of the second clause, which in turn is the result of the first clause).

[*]"eight times as much than"
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
 [1]
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 15 Dec 2021, 04:53
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello, everyone. I just finished responding to a PM on this question. I will provide my thoughts below in an effort to assist the community. (Pardon the PM-like brevity.)

My first round of eliminations:

Quote:
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than in 1960.

(A) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than
(B) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute as
(C) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than it did
(D) and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did
(E) and wood now costs eight times as much as a result to collect and distribute than
Show more
I always like to look for easy targets first, and as much... than creates an improper comparison. We should be looking for as much... as. Meanwhile, the comparison in (E) is nonsensical—wood cannot cost eight times as much as a result. The price of wood needs to be compared to the price of wood. In one fell swoop, we can comfortably get rid of 60 percent of the answer choices.

Round two of eliminations:

Quote:
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel, ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute than in 1960.

(B) resulting in wood now costing eight times as much to collect and distribute as
(D) and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did
Show more
The modifier in (B) is hard to grasp at first—because "ten million acres of forest have been lost... since 1960," this fact is "resulting in wood"? We would expect to see some clear break from the past to usher in a commentary on the consequences. Furthermore, the comparison relies on a lot of ellipsis: wood now costing eight times as much... as [wood cost to collect and distribute] in 1960. Note that costing is an adjective, while the implied "cost" is a verb. These elements within the comparison are not parallel. There should be a better way to express the comparison.

Notice how choice (D) addresses the above concerns. "As a result" indicates that a commentary on the earlier sequence of events is about to follow; it did uses a pronoun and substitute verb to create a clearcut comparison between the cost of wood now and the cost of wood in 1960: "wood now costs" or "[wood costs in the present]" and "[wood cost] in 1960." We have a verb-to-verb comparison, and we have sidestepped the other doubts present in (B).

Perhaps that clarifies a matter or two. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew
avatar
nilaythakkar
avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2021
Last visit: 28 Jul 2022
Posts: 4
Given Kudos: 79
Posts: 4
Kudos: 0
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 21 Jan 2022, 16:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Quote:
Experts, could you please explain the official solution a lil more as to why exactly is B incorrect? I was stuck b/w B and D. I just couldn't point to an error in B. 'resulting' is actually modifying the previous whole clause right? Is the 'as much .. as in 1960' not correct in B? Please help. Thanks :)
Good question! The phrase "resulting in," because it contains a preposition, should introduce a noun or noun phrase that is a result. For example,

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, resulting in mass indigestion." --> What was the result of Tim's culinary negligence? Mass indigestion. Makes sense.

Now look at the relevant portion in (B):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood..."

The result of 10 million acres of forest disappearing was...wood? No. That's illogical. So (B) is out.

The phrase "as a result" will introduce a full clause. Again, poor beleaguered Tim will will help illustrate:

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, and as a result, everyone in town hates him." --> What was the result of Tim poisoning the neighborhood kids? The clause: everyone hates him. Of course they do.

This is the same usage we see in (D):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did."

What is the result of the 10 million acres of forest disappearing? It's the entire clause: wood now costs eight times as much as it used to. Makes perfect sense. Because (D) is logical and (B) is nonsense, (D) is our winner.

I hope that helps!
Show more



"The phrase "resulting in," because it contains a preposition, should introduce a noun or noun phrase that is a result"

So just to get more clarity on this, is below construction okay?

resulting in eight times higher cost of wood than that in 1970

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,764
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,764
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 23 Jan 2022, 06:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nilaythakkar
GMATNinja
Quote:
Experts, could you please explain the official solution a lil more as to why exactly is B incorrect? I was stuck b/w B and D. I just couldn't point to an error in B. 'resulting' is actually modifying the previous whole clause right? Is the 'as much .. as in 1960' not correct in B? Please help. Thanks :)
Good question! The phrase "resulting in," because it contains a preposition, should introduce a noun or noun phrase that is a result. For example,

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, resulting in mass indigestion." --> What was the result of Tim's culinary negligence? Mass indigestion. Makes sense.

Now look at the relevant portion in (B):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood..."

The result of 10 million acres of forest disappearing was...wood? No. That's illogical. So (B) is out.

The phrase "as a result" will introduce a full clause. Again, poor beleaguered Tim will will help illustrate:

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, and as a result, everyone in town hates him." --> What was the result of Tim poisoning the neighborhood kids? The clause: everyone hates him. Of course they do.

This is the same usage we see in (D):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did."

What is the result of the 10 million acres of forest disappearing? It's the entire clause: wood now costs eight times as much as it used to. Makes perfect sense. Because (D) is logical and (B) is nonsense, (D) is our winner.

I hope that helps!



"The phrase "resulting in," because it contains a preposition, should introduce a noun or noun phrase that is a result"

So just to get more clarity on this, is below construction okay?

resulting in eight times higher cost of wood than that in 1970

Posted from my mobile device
Show more

Hello nilaythakkar,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, prepositions should be followed, immediately, by the noun they refer to.

So, the correct version of this construction is "resulting in a cost of wood eight times higher than that in 1970".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,782
 [2]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,782
 [2]
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 29 Jan 2022, 08:37
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nilaythakkar
GMATNinja
Quote:
Experts, could you please explain the official solution a lil more as to why exactly is B incorrect? I was stuck b/w B and D. I just couldn't point to an error in B. 'resulting' is actually modifying the previous whole clause right? Is the 'as much .. as in 1960' not correct in B? Please help. Thanks :)
Good question! The phrase "resulting in," because it contains a preposition, should introduce a noun or noun phrase that is a result. For example,

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, resulting in mass indigestion." --> What was the result of Tim's culinary negligence? Mass indigestion. Makes sense.

Now look at the relevant portion in (B):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, resulting in wood..."  

The result of 10 million acres of forest disappearing was...wood? No. That's illogical. So (B) is out.

The phrase "as a result" will introduce a full clause. Again, poor beleaguered Tim will will help illustrate:

    "Tim fed undercooked burritos to the neighbor's children, and as a result, everyone in town hates him." --> What was the result of Tim poisoning the neighborhood kids? The clause: everyone hates him. Of course they do.

This is the same usage we see in (D):

    "Ten million acres of forest have been lost there since 1960, and as a result wood now costs eight times as much to collect and distribute as it did."

What is the result of the 10 million acres of forest disappearing? It's the entire clause: wood now costs eight times as much as it used to. Makes perfect sense. Because (D) is logical and (B) is nonsense, (D) is our winner.

I hope that helps!

"The phrase "resulting in," because it contains a preposition, should introduce a noun or noun phrase that is a result"

So just to get more clarity on this, is below construction okay?

resulting in eight times higher cost of wood than that in 1970

Posted from my mobile device
Show more
There's limited value in creating your own sentences. On the actual exam, we're asked to compare options, some of which will have concrete errors, some of which won't.

For instance, if one option gave me "resulted in a higher cost" and another gave me "resulted in a cost that was higher," I'm not sure that the second is wrong, but the first is better, because when I'm looking at the second, I stumble at first, wondering "wait, how can something result in a cost," before realizing what the writer intends. 

For your example, if I saw the phrase "resulting in eight times..." I wouldn't have any idea what the writer meant. But if I saw something like "resulting in a 700% increase," that's clearer and therefore better.

The takeaway: don't try to memorize which constructions are "right" and which are "wrong." English is too complicated. Your brain will explode. Instead, learn to recognize when to make the mental shift from thinking about concrete grammatical errors to thinking about what option is clearest and most logical.

For more on setting your priorities in SC, check out this video.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
gmatimothy
User avatar
Joined: 18 Apr 2022
Last visit: 19 Dec 2022
Posts: 111
Own Kudos:
9
Given Kudos: 704
Location: United States
Posts: 111
Kudos: 9
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 01 Jun 2022, 10:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja

If I take your example, but make it a "more..than" sentence, is it safe to say we can drop the verb? I.e., Tim dropped more babies in 1997 than in 1994.

"as" is what makes the verb a requirement in the original problem, is that right?

GMATNinja
abhishek001
Hey gmat ninja can the comparison be an issue to eliminate B and select D as an option. Thanku in advance and also like to state your videos and explanations are really helpful in getting a hold on verbal gmat. Thanku.

Posted from my mobile device
Thank you for the kind words! And yes, the meaning issue in (B) also creates a problematic comparison. When we use a prepositional phrase such as "in 1960" that phrase will typically be used to modify an action.

For example, "Tim dropped as many babies in 1997 as he did in 1994." Notice that the comparison is between how many babies Tim dropped in one year and how many babies he dropped in another year. Most importantly, the prepositional phrases need to modify an action ("dropped", in this case).

In (B) we have "resulting in wood now costing eight times as much... as in 1960." There's no verb for "in 1960" to modify! Contrast this with (D) in which we have "wood now costs eight times as much.. as it did in 1960. Now there's an action, "costs" for "in 1960" to modify, and so we have a logical comparison.

So you were definitely on the right track, abhishek001!
Show more
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,782
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,782
Because 70 percent of the people of India use wood as their sole fuel 02 Jun 2022, 11:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
If I take your example, but make it a "more..than" sentence, is it safe to say we can drop the verb? I.e., Tim dropped more babies in 1997 than in 1994.

"as" is what makes the verb a requirement in the original problem, is that right?
Show more
In the first example, yes: "Tim dropped more babies in 1997 than in 1994" is valid. (Grammatically.)

However, I wouldn't make a rule out of when you need a verb in a comparison. If we had "The Celtics won as many games in 2011 as in 2012," I think that's okay too.

But if I had a long modifier in the middle of the comparison, I might want a verb to clarify, even if I don't technically need one. For instance: "The Celtics won as many games in 2012, when the team was reeling from the aftershock of losing in the Finals the previous year, as they did in 2011."

So the unsatisfying takeaway is that we're going to have to rely on the context and logic of the sentence. Ask yourself if the comparison is logical and clear. If it's not, that option is out. If it is clear, or if you're not sure, move on to other issues. Simple as that.

I hope that helps!
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts