In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to

Question

Project SC Butler: Sentence Correction (SC1) 
 For SC butler Questions  Click Here

In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to burnish his image for history  more assiduously than did any former president .

A) more assiduously than did any former president

B) more assiduously than any other former president

C) with an assiduousness unmatched by any former president

D) with more assiduousness than did any other former president

E) more assiduously in comparison to any former president

Source: Peterson's

generis · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Project SC Butler: Sentence Correction (SC1)

• Split #1: ANY vs. ANY OTHER

Whenever we compare one member of a group to others in that same group we need the words ANY  OTHER .
→  Serena Williams has won more Grand Slam titles than any other woman tennis player. 
→  The United States has recorded more COVID-19 cases than any other country in the world.

We know that this sentence is describing Nixon as a former president because the sentence mentions "after he LEFT the White House."

Well, he can't do something more assiduously than ANY former president because that group includes himself.
If we say that he did something more assiduously than any OTHER former president, we know that the sentence describes all the other former presidents.

To native speakers, this "any OTHER" rule might seem very odd.
Okay. But GMAC still tests the rule, and we must use any  other  in this sort of comparison.

Options A, C, and E fail to use any OTHER former president.
Eliminate them. 
Other errors? 
Option C uses too many words to say what option B does. 
Option E incorrectly uses a comparison word and the phrase  in comparison to  in the same sentence. Wrong.
→ Do not use  more . . . than  and  in comparison to  in the same sentence.  More  already implies comparison.

• Split #2: Concision

Before you start assessing adverbs and adjectives, look at how many words the sentence uses to express the same ideas.

In other words, your  first  style check is for concision.
→ Don't go overboard. Some sentences are better when written in passive voice, and passive voice usually uses more words than active voice.
→ In this case we have an active verb phrase:  strove to burnish,  which just means that he tried to make his image look better

Our remaining options:
B) more assiduously than any other former president
D) with more assiduousness than did any other former president

Option D is grammatical.
But it is longer than B.
Option D uses more words than B does to say the same thing.
Additionally, the phrasing in option D is less direct.
→  with more assiduousness  is not as directly connected to the verb as is  more assiduously.  
(The preposition  with  in option D is part of the problem.  With  is not straight up wrong. In this case, it's just not as effective as the straight adverb. More to the point, the with-phrase is longer than "more assiduously.")
 
Option B uses fewer words to express the same thing as D does.
Choose the shorter version.
Eliminate D.

The answer is B.

NOTES

Did  is an active verb.
It stands in for  strove

Ellipsis? Whether or not to include the word  did ?
When must we repeat the verb?
Answer: It depends.
We can use ellipsis (omission of words) as long as the sentence makes sense.
If the sentence is ambiguous without the repeated verb, repeat the verb.

In option B, we don't need the word "did."
Without  did , are we really tempted to believe that Nixon tried to burnish his historical image more than Nixon tried to burnish "any other" former president?
→ I highly doubt so.

How, exactly, might Nixon go about burnishing a  person? 
We can burnish an image, whether it be our own or that of another person.
But we cannot really burnish a person herself.

I would read  this terrific post, here  on repeating the verb phrase on the GMAT.

COMMENTS

For the most part, the analysis in these answers is varied, creative, and sophisticated.
Your ever-improving critical reasoning skills are on display.
Very nicely done.
If you  explained,  you get kudos.

beeblebrox · Answer

I feel the answer is option B.

In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to burnish his image for history more assiduously than did any former president.

A) more assiduously than   did   any former president

B)   more assiduously than any other former president

C) with an assiduousness unmatched by   (that of, I mean assiduousness of)  any former president

D) with more assiduousness than   did   any other former president

E) more assiduously   in comparison to   any former president  (More X than Y)

zhanbo · Answer

My answer is  (B) . It took me 56 seconds.

(A) After Richard Nixon left the White House, he became a former president himself. It is nonsensical to claim that he strove more assiduously than any former president, himself included. 
(B) Corrected the issue in (A) and looks good. Keep for now.
(C) See (A)
(D) Keep for now. To be compared with (B).
(E) See (A)

Between (B) and (D)  , the general rule is to prefer adverb （more assiduously） than Prep+Noun (with more assiduousness), but we also notice the differences in
"than any other former president" (B)
and 
"than did any other former president" (D)
Which one is better? (D) makes it clear that "any other former president" is subject and can be compared to "Richard Nixon" nicely. It might be slightly better than (B). 
(B) does not preclude such interpretation that "Richard Nixon strove to burnish his image for history more assiduously than he strove to burnish any other former president". But any reasonable reader would not try to misinterpret it this way.
So, I went with (B).

TarunKumar1234 · Answer

In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to burnish his image for history more assiduously than did any former president.

I found this question a bit tough, because I have to choose between one set of difference in ADVERB (assiduously) and PREPOSITION + NOUN (with .... assiduousness) and another set in Comparison between ACTION (to burnish his image for history) and NOUN (former president).

A) more assiduously than did any former president -> "Richard Nixon" is already a former president, there is no point comparing with other people included himself in the comparison list.

B) more assiduously than any other former president -> "more assiduously" is correct. I am keeping it as of now.

C) with an assiduousness unmatched by any former president -> Same as A. Incorrect.

D) with more assiduousness than did any other former president -> Comparison wise "did" looks better. But, "with more assiduousness" is using preposition with NOUN, we can say "more assiduously", it would be better.

E) more assiduously in comparison to any former president -> Same as A. Incorrect.

So, I selected B.

sudeshpatodiya · Answer

X strove to do something more than Y
The comparison is between X and Y and not their actions.

so, I think use of simple noun is ok to refer to Y. 
I don't think we need "did" as in options A and D

A) more assiduously than did any former president  Out for the above mentioned reason

B) more assiduously than any other former president  Correct. The use of "Other" might seem odd, but this is fine here since Richard has already left the white house and now himself is a former president. So the comparison is between Richard and other former presidents.

C) with an assiduousness unmatched by any former president  Very Awkward in the use of unmatched. Also, the choice doesn't specify the comparison with other presidents

D) with more assiduousness than did any other former president  Out for the reason mentioned in A

E) more assiduously in comparison to any former president  A comparison marker is already present "more". We do not need another comparison marker "comparison to".

(B)

ravigupta2912 · Answer

C and D can be eliminated because direct verbs are always preferred over nouns. Also remember the VAN rule when in doubt.

“More” requires a “than” . E eliminated.

A — I couldn’t find any logic for having the verb “did” in the sentence. I admit, I did not immediately think of the illogical “former president”. A bit of a dicy keep.

B - perfect. No errors. Eliminate A and go for B.

Posted from my mobile device

ramlala · Answer

A) more assiduously than  did  any former president

B)  more assiduously than any other former president

C)  with an assiduousness unmatched by  any former president

D)  with more assiduousness  than did any other former president

E) more assiduously  in comparison to  any former president

IMO B

generis · Answer

The official explanation is  here .

41396302717 · Answer

Hello  generis !
I think the did verb plays a very imperative part in the sentence because it states that Richard Nixon did something for history more assiduously than any other former president did. 
If we remove did then one interpretation of the sentence can be that Richard Nixon did something for history more assiduously than for any other former president.
Please help me clarify this doubt.

generis · Answer

Hi  41396302717  ,

Ellipsis (the omission of words) is a difficult subject, so I can understand why you believe what you do.

You need to persuade me that  the sentence is ambiguous  without the word  did .
We can compare actions without repeating the verb or verb phrase the second time.
The test is whether the omission of the verb makes the sentence ambiguous.
If the omission does not create ambiguity, that omission is both correct and preferred.

Ellipsis is not an exact science.
As I noted, we do have a mandate: we can omit nouns, verbs, and even entire clauses from the second term in a comparison  as long as no ambiguity exists in the comparison .

We can omit verb phrases even when we are comparing actions or the intensity of the action.
Correct:  I eat more slowly than Andreas  . 
No ambiguity exists.
We know what that the sentence means.

Wrong:  I fear white supremacists more than Republicans. 
Ambiguity exists.
Do I fear white supremacists more than   Republicans?
Or do I fear white supremacists more than Republicans  ?
Corrected:  I fear white supremacists more than Republicans do.   
In this instance, the word "do" is required to avoid ambiguity.

Correct:  Hank Aaron strove harder to break Babe Ruth's home run record than any other drug-free baseball player in history. 
(Mr. Aaron succeeded. He passed away last week.)
No ambiguity.
We know that Hank Aaron worked harder to do XYZ than any other baseball player worked hard to do XYZ.
Hank Aaron was not "striving hard" to break any other drug-free baseball player in history.
That sentence is ridiculous.

We face a similar situation in this sentence.
The second verb is implied because only one reasonable way to read the sentence exists.

The verb phrase "strove to burnish his reputation" is very specific.
Now, without the word "did," is the sentence really ambiguous?
If so, in what way?

There is no rule that says "If we compare two actions, the second verb must be repeated." 
The measuring stick is clarity. Avoid ambiguity.

Correct, with omission (ellipsis):  In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to burnish his image for history more assiduously than any other former president.

The sentence avoids needless repetition and is not ambiguous.
There is zero chance that a native speaker might believe that Nixon strove to burnish "any other former president." No chance.
You can't burnish a person.

We do not need the verb "did" in this case.

In English, when the actions of two actors are compared, the first verb is often omitted after the second subject.
Repetition of verb phrases makes English prose incredibly tedious to read.

The use of  did  is grammatical but unnecessary.

I hope that answer helps.

41396302717 · Answer

Hello  generis !
This is helpful but I still have the same doubt.
Can't a person interpret it like,  In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to burnish his image for history more assiduously than for any other former president." 
This is the ambiguity I am talking about.
The other interpretation, which should also be the logical one in this case, can be  "In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to burnish his image for history more assiduously than any other former president did(strive to burnish)."

It would be really great if you could help me through.
Thank you.

Arpit_Bhardwaj · Answer

Hi 41396302717,

If we closely look at the portion of the sentence which is not underlined "Richard Nixon strove to burnish his image" . It clearly states that Richard strove to burnish his image. Therefore it doesnt make any sense to say that he did something for his image and compare it with what he did for any other former president to burnish his image.

Hope that helps for anyone having the above question.

In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to

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

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

In the years after he left the White House, Richard Nixon strove to

Prep Toolkit

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