Pardon the delay in my response,
AcceleratorCC. It is fine to ask the questions you have—I would encourage you to do so. I will respond to specific queries below.
AcceleratorCC
Hi
AndrewN, thanks for putting those questions together! A lifesaver for me.
As you know I was new to GMAT. For the first time I read the Manhattan grammar book, I thought I knew the comparison. But after I met those questions, I feel that I know LITTLE about the monsters. I am struggling with those comparisons all these days. I failed three of the four questions at the first attempt. The thing that drove me crazy is not the "as...as..." comparison, but the omitted words in the second half of the comparison, no matter if it is for "as...as..." or "more than". I hope you would kindly shed some light on my questions.
I didn't quite get the "redundancy" caused by the "energy". What I learnt about the comparison is that the second half of the comparison should be parallel to the first half of the comparison.
If there is a noun (energy) in the first half, why the noun/pronoun becomes redundant in the second half? Regarding the sentence "
The generator stores more energy now than in the past", indeed I couldn't find a way to squeeze in "energy" after than. But I was wondering if we could say
"The generator stores more energy now than
it stores in the past"?
In addition to that, is the sentence "The energy stored by generator now is more than
that/it/the energy stored in the past" correct? or which is the correct noun/pronoun in this sentence? I am really confused about whether we should include the noun/pronoun.
Do not worry about conditions that create redundancy. Just test what the grammar seems to suggest and ask yourself whether the conveyed meaning is reasonable. Yes, you could write,
The generator stores more energy now than it stored in the past. Why? Because
it has a clear referent in
generator, and the second appearance of the verb precludes a misinterpretation, namely that
it could refer to
energy. The comparison has shifted from a tighter
now versus then to
the generator stores more energy than the generator stored. The verb tenses convey the comparison just fine, but the extra words in
now and
in the past provide further context that does not hinder the meaning.
AcceleratorCC
I also found a question "Employment costs rose 2.8 percent in the 12 months that ended in September, slightly less than
they did in the year that ended in the previous quarter", can we exclude the "they did"? I feel that it is similar to "The generator stores more energy now than in the past"......
Similar, yes, but notice how far the comparative elements are in the above sentence. If the sentence were rephrased
in the past 12 months, and that information were placed closer to the second element,
in the [previous] year, then the author might feel as though a pronoun-verb combination was no longer necessary to preface the second element:
... rose 2.8 percent in the past 12 months, slightly less than in the previous year. The more information inserted between elements A and B, the greater the likelihood of seeing a reminder in the form of a pronoun-verb pair to clarify what the sentence is aiming to convey.
AcceleratorCC
I was wondering if you would kindly help me draw some conclusions about the "the noun/pronoun
must be included in the second half", "the noun/pronoun
must not be included in the second half" and "it doesn't matter if include or not"? I know it is impossible to have "hard-and-fast" rule, and it is case by case. I just want to get some general ideas/rules that could help me analyze the questions. For example,
can I categorize the first three questions as "the noun/pronoun must not be included in the second half"? what structure/feature makes them fall in this category? For the sentence "The energy stored by generator now is more than that/it/the energy stored in the past", why the noun/pronoun is required (please correct me if I made mistake here)? Both versions are comparing the amount of energy generated/stored at present compared to the amount generated/stored in the past, what the differences make one require a pronoun and the other not?I think I have answered your queries above. I will reiterate that you should not look to create rules, but to lean on the context of a given sentence for guidance, and to test different answer choices that seem reasonable to you.
AcceleratorCC
AndrewN
Answer choice (E): three times as many institutions charge under $8,000 a year as those charging over $16,000.
Interpretation: three times as many institutions charge under $8,000 a year as institutions charging over $16,000.
Why has the verb charge in the comparison morphed into a different form—the adjective modifier charging—later on? The comparison should be between what some institutions charge and what other institutions charge. Keep things simple, tit for tat. If answer choice (E) is an imposter, then only (D) remains. Test within our stripped-down shell of the comparison:
Can we say "as those charge"? In this case, we don't change the verb "charge" to "-ing" modifier. If not, why?
I am sorry for bringing up so many questions, some of which may look obvious to you. Though I read many comments of other experts and Manhattan book, and looked at several videos about comparison, I still couldn't figure them out. If those questions are not good to ask here, do you mind sharing some articles/videos/links with me so that I can learn the comparison better before asking? Thanks in advance for your help!
No,
as those charge would not make sense either. Test the comparison:
three times as many institutions charge under $8,000 a year as those charge over $16,000Ask yourself, what does
those stand in for? Replace the word with its logical referent:
three times as many institutions charge under $8,000 a year as institutions charge over $16,000The comparison (or contrast) is between
under and
over in this sentence, and since
institutions falls before the verb,
charge, it is carried over into the second element as an understood subject. Thus, it is unnecessary to repeat the noun ahead of the second verb.
I see too many people look to create tidy rules on niche topics, kind of how in Quant, everyone seems to want to know about combinatorics, even though the topic is pretty narrowly tested. In this case, just learn what you can from comparisons as you go. Since you have the Manhattan set of guides, if you miss a question on comparisons, check the appropriate section to see whether it makes more sense to you the second (or fifth) time you read it.
Thank you for thinking to follow up.
- Andrew