In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and tens of

Question

Project SC Butler: Day 84 Sentence Correction (SC2) 
 For SC butler Questions  Click Here

In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and  tens of thousands of companies have shifted operations to the mainland in search of wider margins.

A) In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and

B) China's wages are two times more than in Taiwan, where

C) In China, where wages are more than two times those in Taiwan,

D) China has wages that are more than two times those of Taiwan's, and

E) The wages of China, which are two times more than in Taiwan, are causing

T his question may or may not contain an accurate representation of a question from Princeton Review's Verbal Workout, 4th edition.
The question is retired.

The  best or excellent answers get kudos , which will be  awarded  after   the answer is revealed.
More than one award of kudos is possible.

Chei · Answer

China's wages are two times more than in Taiwan, where...
B is my answer

Posted from my mobile device

aanjumz92 · Answer

IMO Option C is correct because it correctly explains that it is in China that wages are greater AND it is in China where thousands of companies have moved.

A is grammatically wrong.
B is wrong as "where" modifies Taiwan, not China. 
D is wrong. It is too wordy/awkward.
E is wrong in that China is incorrectly modified.

NRJ11090 · Answer

In answer choice B the two entities being compared are not parallel. "China's wages are two times more than in Taiwan" doesn't even convey the meaning properly, hence wrong

StudiosTom · Answer

My remarks in blue.
 Ans:C

sahilmshah92 · Answer

Answer is C, in my opinion.
The sentence is trying to convey the meaning that because wages in China are two times more than wages in Taiwan, companies are shifting to the mainland in search of wider margins to cover up the increase in costing.
 
A: Parallelism (China's wages would be parallel to Taiwan's wages) and meaning error (it does not convey the reason that the companies shifting is because of the higher wages in China).
B: Parallelism and 'where' refers to Taiwan.
C: Correct
D: Meaning error (as explained in Option A).
E: Verb error. ("The wages of China  are causing  tens of thousands of companies  have shifted  operations to the mainland in search of wider margins."

GKomoku · Answer

In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and tens of thousands of companies have shifted operations to the mainland in search of wider margins.

A) In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and -
[color=#00ffff]The idiom two times more than is incorrect. Correct usage is more than two times.[/color]

B) China's wages are two times more than in Taiwan, where -comparison between wages in two countries is incorrect

C) In China, where wages are more than two times those in Taiwan, -Correct

D) China has wages that are more than two times those of Taiwan's, and -comparison between wages in two countries is incorrect

E) The wages of China, which are two times more than in Taiwan, are causing -comparison between wages in two countries is incorrect.Also are causing is incorrect ,does not fit well in the second part of sentence

Error analysis: heart.JPG In the given sentence structure compared items are not // to each other. In China, wages are..... Taiwan's wages are It's better to rewrite --> wages in China are ... in Taiwan China's wages are ... Taiwan's In SC comparison and //ism go hand in hand Please see more in Mister Mike's explanation about SC comparisons --> POE com.JPG A) In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and B) China's wages are two times more than in Taiwan , where D) China has wages that are more than two times those of Taiwan's , and (those refers to wages, "taiwan's" also has ellipsed "wages" redundant) E) The wages of China , which are two times more than in Taiwan , are causing ("are causing" is wrong verb tense here, the author presents information as general fact so present simple is required) C) In China, where wages are more than two times those in Taiwan, C.JPG C is the answer (even if I'm not happy with sentence construction)

Archit3110 · Answer

I have marked D over C

In C the sentence meaning of sentence after underline part seems not connected well.. where as in D the meaning of the sentence seems to be correct

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

Difficulty Level:   550  
Concept tested:  Comparisons and Idioms

This question could be tough but its answer choices make it easy to go with.

A) In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and

A is wrong for the reasons such as 1.  than Taiwan's  it is wrong.  than that of taiwan  or  than are in taiwan  either is fine. 2. Use of  and  is wrong there is no such idiom in the question (X and Y)

B) China's wages are two times more than in Taiwan, where

Wong comparison here, it also changes the meaning. it says like china and taiwan both are being compared with something else.

C) In China, where wages are more than two times those in Taiwan,

No redundancy, correct comparison only seems awkward construction but grammatically it is correct.

D) China has wages that are more than two times those of Taiwan's, and

Unnecessary lengthy construction, it also changes the meaning it says china's total wages are two times than taiwan. Use of  and  is also wrong

E) The wages of China, which are two times more than in Taiwan, are causing

are causing  is wrongly used here and comparison is also wrong.

best answer is    C

Hope it helps

daagh · Answer

Dear generis,

I am seeking a small clarification. I am not clear what 'mainland' refers to. I am under the impression that 'mainland' refers to the sprawling continental China as distinct from the diminutive Taiwan. 
It is also stated that many companies have shifted to the mainland (the Peoples' Republic of China)
 
Why would companies shift to the mainland in spite of higher wages there, if their intent were to earn wider margins?

My doubt is that 'mainland' may not refer to geographically the greater China, as I understand, but to Taiwan as per this statement, as the wages are low in Taiwan. Could you kindly clarify?

2. Choice C says that  in China,  the companies have shifted to mainland, not to Taiwan, Does this sync with the orginal meaning?
 
Sorry, my poor knowledge of global geography is not helping me.

Thanks in advance and regards

generis · Answer

Project SC Butler: Day 84 Sentence Correction (SC2)

For SC butler Questions Click Here

In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and tens of thousands of companies have shifted operations to the mainland in search of wider margins.

A) In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and

B) China's wages are two times more than in Taiwan, where

C) In China, where wages are more than two times those in Taiwan,

D) China has wages that are more than two times those of Taiwan's, and

E) The wages of China, which are two times more than in Taiwan, are causing

This question may or may not contain an accurate representation of a question from Princeton Review's Verbal Workout, 4th edition.
The question is retired.

The best or excellent answers get kudos, which will be awarded after the answer is revealed.
More than one award of kudos is possible.

Archived Topic

Hi there,

This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.

Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Forum

Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.

Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!

Company X pays higher wages.

• Parallelism: In B, D, and E, the construction of the comparison between wages in the two countries is not parallel. • Choice D uses a redundant phrase, those of Taiwan's Correct: those of Taiwan Correct: Taiwan's Wrong : those of Taiwan's (one or the other, not both) • E adds are causing , which messes up the idiom of the second half of the sentence (the idiom is cause . . . to) COMMENTS Chei , aanjumz92 , NRJ11090 , sahilmshah92 and AnkitOrYadav , welcome! I would eliminate answers almost exactly as that OE describes. I think today that all correct answers get smiley faces, that GKomoku gets kudos for best answer and gets bumped. I am glad to see people engaging in dialogue. Nice work, everyone.

generis · Answer

daagh , you are correct. The author of this question needs to look at a map, which is easily found on the internet. Taiwan is the island. China is the mainland. I am not sure whether your post, including this statement, is tongue-in-cheek. Your sophisticated and often elegant prose is also often worldly. I am glad that you brought up the issue, because: (1) my first thought when I read this sentence was, "Whoever wrote this sentence is geographically challenged. Taiwan is the island. China is the mainland. How does a company increase its profit margins if it moves to a place where labor costs are higher?" and (2) my second thought was, "Are people going to catch that the logic is exactly backwards? And continue anyway?" Well, two people did. You and GKomoku . What was my point in using the question? To steep aspirants in tolerating uncertainty in situations in which the uncertainty does not affect the answer. At times, official questions seem to me to be insensible or nonsensical. The official answers are correct. Outside the context of the GMAT, I know what I know, and I would never let a few such examples go out my editing door. In the context of the GMAT? I conform to whatever GMAC says is correct. No group of people has a monopoly on what constitutes correct grammar and sentence construction generally. One group of people has a monopoly on what constitutes correct grammar and sentence construction on the GMAT. It is difficult to strike the right balance among knowing the rules, deciphering the meaning, and understanding when to tolerate uncertainty and when not to do so. Practice makes progress. If the confusion does not affect the option split because the confusion or error affects every option, then even if the confusion stems from our own shortcoming, because the confusion affects all options equally, we should let it go. I hoped to demonstrate that even if the logic appears to be or is "switched," the correct answer does not depend on that part of the logic. I hoped that people would 1) note the error; and 2) ignore the error. Every option has the same logical error; that error does not matter. Recently I posted yet again about the not-ironclad (and perhaps defunct) "poisonous pronoun" rule. I have written extensively about that issue. One such post is HERE . In this official question about the goddess Bona Dea , a possessive noun is the antecedent for an object pronoun, her . -- People are still being taught that possessive nouns can be antecedents of only one type of pronoun (possessive). Such people would read that question and its options, and at least initially, these people would think that the construction were erroneous. At some point, I hope, these people would see that the answer is not affected by what would look like an error to them. -- In every option, the goddess Bona Dea's aid is the phrase from which we must choose the antecedent of to thank/thanking HER . This question presents a similar problem; no answer appears to be correct because the underlined portion is illogical. As you probably know, among the hardest skills to impart is the ability to stop staring at proverbial trees and take a look at the forest. -- Yes, stare at the trees until doing so becomes an exercise in futility. Then peer through an expansive lens. See the forest. -- The ability to tolerate uncertainty is rare. In SC, at times, that ability is imperative. I was trying to demonstrate that an aspirant may not like the least bad of five questionable options, but if that option is the most correct, the aspirant does not have to like it. She just has to choose it. Thank you for raising the issue. Regards.

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

generis , all your comments about going with what the GMAT says should come with two important qualifications: 1) This applies only to official questions. Unofficial questions (even ours) can be wrong! 2) The reason that we accept GMAT answers is not just that the GMAT makes the rules, but also that official questions are incredibly well-edited, and any poor examples will generally not be published. Why does this matter? 1) This question is not an official question. It's not even a Princeton Review question. It's a very poor retread of a Princeton Review question and it contains multiple meaning errors that end up making all the choices invalid. 2) If it were a GMAT question and it didn't seem to make sense, we'd want to dig until it did make sense, because we could be confident that there was some logic we were missing that we might need to understand for the test. Since this is just a bad question, we don't want to dig at all! It may help to look at the original question to see some of the trouble this version got into: https://books.google.com/books?id=aP8ZA ... an&f=false To begin with, the original does not confuse the mainland with the island, nor does it suggest that wages are higher in China! Beyond that, it correctly uses "five times," whereas for 2x we'd want "twice."

daagh · Answer

Dear generis,

Thanks for the painstaking explanation. I think the meaning problem could be brushed aside, if the company just makes a small correction that In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and tens of thousands of companies have shifted operations to 
Taiwan in search of wider margins.

However, in the interest of the members and the forum, mediocrity should be denounced and discouraged at least by non-official players.

Regards

generis · Answer

DmitryFarber , as I explained in the other question at issue, something is wrong with the fourth edition of Princeton's Verbal Workout, or something is wrong with my purchased hard copy of the book. I agree that official questions are incredibly well-edited. I frequently mention that writing these questions is a formidable challenge, and that the questions go through extensive editing and testing. A well-edited question that tests multiple concepts is an accomplishment. On rare occasions, even a well-edited question can be written in a way that is jarring. Every once in a while, I encounter an official question, however well-edited, whose prose jars me. I was trying to convey that no matter how jarring an official question may be, and for whatever reason, the task is to find the correct answer. I would be surprised if a few of the hundreds of official questions I have read did not bother me. Past a point, "rhetorical construction" becomes a matter of judgment and taste. If you believe that all official sentences exhibit elegant prose? Okay. I disagree with you about a few official questions. I will archive both of these questions. Thank you for the information. SC wages and anger questions Princeton Review.jpg Princeton Verbal 4th ed..jpg

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

In China, wages are two times more than Taiwan's are and tens of

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards