Because the Earth’s crust is more solid there and thus better able to

Some thoughts:
1. “X of Y” means Y’s X.
=> “X of Y” indicates y possesses X. It is a possessive case.
If we say “earthquake of a given magnitude”, we mean “A given magnitude’s earthquake”. It does not make sense, and it is awkward.
=> This rule eliminates A, and B.
2. Comparative Degree:
=> Whenever we see “than”, we expect a comparative form of adjective such as “greater, smaller, taller, more beautiful before “than”.
=> Look at option C. There is no such comparative form of adjective. So, C is out.
3. “100 times more area” is unidiomatic:
=> Then idiomatic usage with 100 times includes:
--- “100 times the area that”
---“100 times the area of X”
---“100 time more likely than”
=> This rule eliminates E.
Besides, the option E has tense problem.

Answer is D.

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to getting this question correct; the intended meaning of this sentence is that an earthquake that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than an earthquake of comparable magnitude that occurs in the West will.

Concepts tested here: Comparison + Meaning + Awkwardness/Redundancy

A: Trap. This answer choice incorrectly compares “an earthquake of a given magnitude” to “it” (the same earthquake)", incorrectly implying that one earthquake typically devastates an area 100 times greater when it occurs in the eastern United States than when it occurs in the West; the intended meaning of this sentence is that an earthquake that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than an earthquake of comparable magnitude that occurs in the West will.

B: This answer choice incorrectly compares “an earthquake of a given magnitude” to “it” (the same earthquake)", incorrectly implying that one earthquake typically devastates an area 100 times greater when it occurs in the eastern United States than when it occurs in the West; the intended meaning of this sentence is that an earthquake that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than an earthquake of comparable magnitude that occurs in the West will. Further, Option B uses the needlessly indirect phrase "devastate 100 times the area", leading to awkwardness.

C: This answer choice uses the needlessly indirect phrase "devastate 100 times the area", leading to awkwardness.

D: Correct. This answer choice correctly compares “an earthquake of a given magnitude in the eastern United States” with “a quake of comparable magnitude occurring in the West”, conveying the intended meaning of the sentence- that an earthquake that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than an earthquake of comparable magnitude that occurs in the West will. Further, Option D is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

E: his answer choice incorrectly compares “an earthquake of a given magnitude” to “it” (the same earthquake)", incorrectly implying that one earthquake typically devastates an area 100 times greater when it occurs in the eastern United States than when it occurs in the West; the intended meaning of this sentence is that an earthquake that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than an earthquake of comparable magnitude that occurs in the West will.

Hence, D is the best answer choice.

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Because the Earth’s crust is more solid there and thus better able to transmit shock waves, an earthquake of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West.
(A) of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West
it gives a impression that same quake will occur in the west also
(B) of a given magnitude will typically devastate 100 times the area if it occurs in the eastern United States instead of the West
same problem as above
(C) will typically devastate 100 times the area in the eastern United States than one of the comparable magnitude occurring in the West
an area 100 times greater...is better than 100 times the area
(D) in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than will a quake of comparable magnitude occurring in the West
correct
(E) that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate 100 times more area than if it occurred with comparable magnitude in the Wests
same problem as A,B

(A) of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West
( "It" has no clear referent)
(B) of a given magnitude will typically devastate 100 times the area if it occurs in the eastern United States instead of the West
( "It" has no clear referent, here it refers area)
(C) will typically devastate 100 times the area in the eastern United States than one of the comparable magnitude occurring in the West

(D) in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than will a quake of comparable magnitude occurring in the West

(E) that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate 100 times more area than if it occurred with comparable magnitude in the West

Good Question Kudos for that



Just a quick note: As we not talking about any particular area rather Areas in general usage of THE AREA is wrong ( B,C commit this error)

Pretty tough question !!!
Please find my reasoning below.

If anything is wrong,please feel free to advise

Bumping. Good question!!

As per the meaning, we are comparing earthquakes in the Eastern and Western part.

Because the Earth's crust is more solid there and thus better able to transmit shock waves, an earthquake of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West.

(A) of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West
(B) of a given magnitude will typically devastate 100 times the area if it occurs in the eastern United States instead of the West : Comparison of Eastern earthquake with western part itself.
(C) will typically devastate 100 times the area in the eastern United States than one of comparable magnitude occurring in the West What is One referring to? Quake or Area? Not clear. Hence, incorrect
(D) in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than will a quake of comparable magnitude occurring in the West: Correct comparison. Correct answer
(E) that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate 100 times more area than if it occurred with comparable magnitude in the West

Because the Earth's crust is more solid there and thus better able to transmit shock waves, an earthquake of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West.

The subtle clue is in the use of the pronoun 'it'. An earthquake in the east… that if it occurred in the west means that the very same quake in the east will have to relocate to the west to cause the damage. That is not what the passage wants to say. It is talking of quakes of comparable strength in two different geographies. That is the reason we can instantly dump choices A, B, and E.


(A) of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West -- 'it' is wrong as explained above

(B) of a given magnitude will typically devastate 100 times the area if it occurs in the eastern United States instead of the West -- same as A; in addition, there is slip - up in the prepositional parallelism. It should be 'in the west" rather than simply 'the west'

(C) will typically devastate 100 times the area in the eastern United States than one of comparable magnitude occurring in the West- because we comparing an action namely devastate, we must match the verb in the first arm with a matching verb in the second arm, lest the comparison turns out between a devastation and an earthquake

(D) in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than will a quake of comparable magnitude occurring in the West -- This is the best choice with proper comparison and prepositional parallelism and no pronoun error

(E) that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate 100 times more area than if it occurred with comparable magnitude in the West-- same pronoun problem of it. The sentence is also wrong as per the construct of the second conditional. You can't use a simple future in the main clause

Because the Earth's crust is more solid there and thus better able to transmit shock waves, an earthquake of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West.

(A) of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it does in the West

(B) of a given magnitude will typically devastate 100 times the area if it occurs in the eastern United States instead of the West

(C) will typically devastate 100 times the area in the eastern United States than one of the comparable magnitude occurring in the West

(D) in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than will a quake of comparable magnitude occurring in the West

(E) that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate 100 times more area than if it occurred with comparable magnitude in the West

GMATNinjaTwo Why A is incorrect? I selected A because it states a general fact and we need present tense to state a general fact.

Could you help to explain the "will" clause in (D)?

Option A has a meaning problem - option A implies that ANY earthquake (originated anywhere on the face of earth) would devastate 100x area in eastern US and x area in the west (i.e. one earthquake causing devastation to both areas). This does not make sense.

However option D correctly conveys that an earthquake in eastern US would cause devastation in 100x area, while an earthquake of same magnitude in western US would cause devastation in x area. (2 different earthquakes in two different regions are referred to.)

I got the right answer D by eliminating choices B,C, & E for using phrase "devastate 100 times the area".
As per the question stem, we are comparing degree of devastation in a particular area "devastate an area 100 times".

Please guide me whether my reasoning is correct.

I understand the OA, but I have one silly doubt. Please bear with me: In option D 'earthquake....devastate an area', shouldn't it be 'devastates'?

Hi ShashwatPrakash, this is something that you need to be comfortable with:

In future tense, we always use a plural form of the verb, irrespective of whether the subject is singular or plural.

D is in future tense: earthquake....will devastate...

Hence, despite a singular subject (earthquake), we use the plural verb devastate.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana has a note on this property. Have attached the corresponding section of the book, for your reference.

Hi AjiteshArun

Why is option a incorrect? Why can’t the same earthquake devastate both the eastern and western area? The non-underlined part clearly tells us that the eastern area is pretty vulnerable as compared to the western area? How do we know that we are supposed to compare two separate earthquakes of comparable magnitudes ? How do we make that distinction? As per the original sentence it is the same earthquake no?

I don’t have any problem eliminating option b, c and e..

Kindly help

Best Regards,
Adit

Posted from my mobile device

Hi aditliverpoolfc,

This question asks us to take a meaning call. Let's take a look at the non-underlined portion first:

Because the Earth’s crust is more solid there (eastern United States) and thus better able to transmit shock waves

Now we need to take a call: should we restrict what the sentence has to say to just one earthquake? Let's assume that the epicentre of this one earthquake is somewhere in the west. Will that earthquake really cause "100x devastation" in the east, thousands of kilometres away? Or is it more likely that the intended meaning is that if the same amount of energy is ~applied in the east and in the west, the devastation in the east will be 100x that in the west?

Isn't this question checks S-V agreement, by the word "devastates" and "devastate"?

Hi lakshya14,

Here are the five options:
1. an earthquake... devastates
2. an earthquake... will devastate
3. an earthquake... will devastate
4. an earthquake... will devastate
5. an earthquake... will devastate

In the first option, devastates is a verb, but in 2-5, the verb is actually will devastate. The will (helping verb) in those verbs effectively means that the devastate will not change even if the subject is singular. For example:

He studies.
They study.

He will study.
They will study.

Switching from he to they makes no difference if we use a will.