Combined, Texas and Kansas raise cattle that are worth almost as much

The legitimate question here is whether ‘worth’ is a count noun or a non- count noun. Worth is a value. There is nothing like this has one worth, two worths and ten worths. Therefore it is singular.

What can not be counted therefore will not entail a plural pronoun such as ‘those’. Hence C and E have to be ruled out. A is also out because of taking cattle as plural and using the plural verb are. B is using an improper comparison. Only D could be a valid answer, IMO
_________________

Even I marked D.

But I just found an interesting piece of information....Our general notion is that collective nouns such as army etc are singular. However Words such as cattle/police are plural (exceptions )

So the OA is correct and is E

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

(Pronoun Error) The first “that” in the underlined part is a conjunction, while the second “that” (in the phrase “as that of the forty-eight states that remain”) is a singular pronoun. The earlier part of the sentence shows that there is no singular noun, which could serve as an antecedent for “as that.” So, (A) is wrong. (D) has the same error, and can be eliminated for that reason alone.

In (B), the word “worth” serves as the antecedent of the pronoun “that:” that of the forty-eight states. But this directly compares the value to the remaining states, resulting in the comparison of an apple (the worth of the cattle) and an orange (the remaining states); hence, (B) is wrong.

(C) and (E) are both grammatically correct. The difference is in the phrases “almost as much in worth as” and “worth almost as much as.” Between the two, the latter is shorter and is therefore more idiomatic, and (E) is the answer. (It is always best to choose the shorter version when in doubt; the fewer words the better, and usually the clearer.)

Still waiting for OA here. It is a clear battle between D and E. Who will win?
I think the most important thing is to ask ourselves

Is cattle singular or plural?

Cheers
J

Hi,
I think the OA is correct as is,but since there are several discussions saying C is the right one,I would like to confirm my reasoning.

Cattle is always plural;hence A and D could be eliminated.
Cattle of a worth is also wrong;hence B can be eliminate
Between C and E,E is more precise.The comparison is between the cattle from Texas and Kansas,and other states-those from the remaining states are worth less.

Is there anything wrong in my reasoning?

--edit typo : "saying D" to "saying C"--

In both C and E, some words have been omitted - the omission in E is allowed whereas that in C is not:

C: Combined, Texas and Kansas raise cattle (that are) almost as much in worth as those of the remaining forty-eight states.
E. Combined, Texas and Kansas raise cattle (that) worth almost as much as those of the remaining forty-eight states.

The omission of relative pronoun "that" is allowed, but omission of verb is not allowed.

Hi.

Why is the use of those ambiguous. It looks correct to me. Please see the explanation:
1) the comparison is not between Cattle of Kansas , Texas and rest of that of the rest of the states, but the comparison is between their worth. So it should be singular.

Worth of X is similar to that of Y.

However in this question . The worth of remaining 48 states is taken into consideration. Worth of 1 state, 2 states, 3 states, 48 states. Consequently usage of those of is correct.

Posted from my mobile device

In option A there is no antecedent for the second “that”. “that” is singular but there are no singular nouns in the first half od the sentence that it could refer to. Option D has the same problem, so both of them can be discarded. B corrects this problem, “worth” serves as an antecedent for “that”. However, this option has a comparison problem, it compares “value” to “the remaining states”. Now, the reaming two options are both technically correct. I think that then E should be the better answer since it is a bit more concise.

Experts,

would you pls suggest why we need "those" out here that is plural pronoun.

As per my understanding second "that" is referring to "worth", as we are comparing "worth" that is uncountable noun.
So shouldn't it be singular pronoun "that" only instead of "those" ?

thanks in advance !

Hey abhik1502
We are comparing cattle, not worth. The basis for comparison is worth. When you say "that" you refer to worth.
Option E - Combined, Texas and Kansas raise cattle worth almost as much as those (Cattle) of the remaining forty-eight states.
Now try to replace those with that (Worth). It won't make sense.

I am no expert, but hope this helps!

Thanks Brian for the reply !
Incase it is cattle then it will make sense. But still I differ whether sentence really mean same.

Also we are using as much as , which is genrally used with non-countable noun.

Worth is indeed non-countable. You can't say one worth, two worth, three worth, etc. Could you please elaborate on the "sentence really mean same" portion?

Sentence is comparing the worth of cattle from state T & K with worth of cattle from other states. So Pronoun should refer to worth only.

Not as worth is non-countable noun, so it should have been "that" in my opinion.
More over phrase "as much as" somewhere supports this fact that we are comparing non-countable noun.

And overall this raises my doubt, why option E is correct with plural pronoun "those"

Cattle is actually plural. So those wins vs that. Only E remains.

I am confused with the function of worth in option E.
In my view, worth is past participle.
if worth had been a Noun. Option E would have mean:

Texas and Kanas raise cattle worth., which is non-sensial.