In 1973 mortgage payments represented twenty-one percent of an average thirty-year-old male's income; and forty-four percent in 1984

A. income; and forty-four percent in 1984 - incorrect sentence structure- semicolon+ and incorrectly separates an IC and a phrase here
B. income; in 1984 the figure was forty-four percent
C. income, and in 1984 forty-four percent
D. income, forty-four percent in 1984 was the figure - run- on sentence
E. income that rose to forty-four percent in 1984 - that incorrectly refers to income

I was down to options B and C and ended up choosing option C.
1. In option B, what does 'the figure' refer to? Logically, it seems that it refers to the percentage of average thirty-year-old male's income represented by mortgage payments.
Can you give some examples of such construction?
2. Also, what is the issue with option C?

AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , GMATGuruNY , VeritasPrepBrian , MartyTargetTestPrep , DmitryFarber , VeritasKarishma , generis , jennpt , other experts
_________________

Hi Skywalker18,

Happy to help

You are correct here that "figure" refers to "the percentage of average thirty-year-old male's income represented by mortgage payments". The word "figure" used in this way can refer to any number (or percentage). For example:

In December, I read 8 books; in January, the figure was 10.

The chart illustrating the stock price indicates that the figure increased over time.

In the first sentence, "figure" refers to the number of books. In the second, it refers to the stock price.

Regarding your second question, when we use a comma followed by "and", a complete clause must follow. In choice C, there is no subject/verb, and so no clause. It would be correct if it instead stated:

In 1973 mortgage payments represented twenty-one percent of an average thirty-year-old male's income, and in 1984 they represented forty-four percent.

In that case, we have a clause following "and", since we now have a subject ("they") and a verb ("represented").

I hope that helps!
-Carolyn
_________________

Skywalker18

C can't even be considered without a verb.

{Independent clause + [comma] + FANBOYS + Independent clause} is the correct construction.

In C we have {(subject) + (verb) + Prepositions) + [Comma] + FANBOYS (AND) + Preposition+ (subject)} - so we're missing a finite verb.

In 1973 mortgage payments represented twenty-one percent of an average thirty-year-old male's income, and in 1984 forty-four percent

However, in B we have

{independent clause} + [semicolon] + {independent clause}

B. income; in 1984 the figure was forty-four percent
_________________

GMATNinja, could you please explain why option C is wrong?

Check out this post and this post if you haven't already.

In (C), we are expecting an independent clause (with a subject+verb pair) after the comma+conjunction (", and"). Instead we get, "..., and in 1984 forty-four percent (???)." Does that mean that mortgage payments represented forty-four percent of an average thirty-year-old male's income in 1984? Probably. But the meaning isn't entirely clear.

And again, we expect a subject+verb pair after the comma+conjunction (", and"). So at first glance "forty-four percent" seems like the subject of a new independent clause... until we realize that there is no corresponding verb. At that point we have to go back and fill in a bunch of blanks to make this sentence work.

Is (C) absolutely wrong, grammatically? Maybe, maybe not. However, the meaning is much more clear in choice (B), so that's our winner.
_________________

In 1973 mortgage payments represented twenty-one percent of an average thirty-year-old male's income; and forty-four percent in 1984

Meaning: in 1973 mortgage represented 21 percent. In 1984, it represented 44 percent

A. income; and forty-four percent in 1984 the second clause is incomplete
B. income; in 1984 the figure was forty-four percent Two independents clauses, separated by semicolon
C. income, and in 1984 forty-four percent forty-four percent is compared to mortgage payments
D. income, forty-four percent in 1984 was the figure two independent clauses could not be connected by comma
E. income that rose to forty-four percent in 1984 change in meaning. not that income rose to 44 percent but the mortgage payments

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.
_________________