There are hopeful signs that we are shifting away from our heavy relia

In my opinion 'it' is also referring to 'energy generated'. Where am I wrong in this regard?? Please correct me.

Why does option b is incorrect doesn't it make sense by saying that as much energy is generated through wind power as it was (generated) in 1990 generated can be skipped in this case i think please correct me
GMATNinja

Hi! AndrewN IanStewart You guys have been my lifesaver lately.
In this question, I saw various experts saying that in B and D the use of it is wrong because it refers to whole phrase "more than ten times as much energy". But I am not sure if this is the reason to eliminate it. I think the comparison itself is not correct. "more than ten times as much energy is generated through wind power now as it was(Energy was generated) in 1990. its not clearly comparing the amount was ten times. Please comment on this.

Hello, pk6969. To be honest, I respect what other Experts have said earlier in the thread on the matter. I did not even use it to eliminate any answer. Rather, after eliminating answer choices (A) and (E) for as much... than, I considered (B) and (D) side by side and thought that the placement of now was not a decisive issue:


Since there was no way to tease apart these two iterations of the sentence other than to say that I preferred one version over another—i.e. there could not be two correct answers—I got rid of both. Choice (C) was the last one standing, and I found no flaws in it, so I chose it.

I know this may not be the response you were hoping for, but I call things as I see them, and sometimes looking at the same problem from a different angle can prove just as effective in arriving at an accurate conclusion.

- Andrew
_________________

some comparison contain hard pattern. this is hard for us to remember this pattern. there are many strange pattern of comparison. some pattern contain "the case ..." . some pattern contain the second clause without subject.

the key to success on this problem is to realizing the error and then we will accept the remaining choice easily

Hi IanStewart and AjiteshArun
GMATNinja and avigutman


I have the same question as this club member did, and another bigger question: how should we decide whether the second half of a sentence that uses "as...as" comparison structure omits its subject properly?

Many textbooks say that if the second half does not have its own subject, its subject should be the same as the subject of the main clause. An example would be "Crude oil prices are higher now than they were in January," in which we can drop "they" (or "they were") as the word "they " just refers to the subject in the first half of the sentence.

But, when dealing with SC questions that are more complex or have lots of quantitative modifiers, I find it difficult to apply such technique and thus fail to discern whether the second half is properly structured. Examples are this official question and another official question. I'll list them below and remove the less ideal options that don't have the second "as" to complete the "as...as" structure.




These two sentences seem to adopt a similar structure: both of them are intended to compare the amount (of energy)/ number (of education institutions) and both of them place lots of quantitative modifiers before the subjects. But the first question's correct answer has its own subject "the case" for the second half, while the second question's correct answer omits the subject of the second half.

I have three questions:

1. For the wind power question, what do you think about the use of "it" in the option (B) and (D)?

Some experts have pointed out that the use of the pronoun "it" is incorrect, because "it" refers to the "entire antecedent/subject", which is "more than ten times as much energy." The sentence would carry an illogical meaning if "more than ten times as much energy" is used as the subject of the second half.

But, I am not sure about this interpretation of the pronoun "it." Though I am not sure whether the pronoun "it" can refer to the word "energy" alone, neither am I sure whether a so-called "entire subject" includes the modifier "more than ten times as much." These modifiers show the level of comparison--the first "as" modifies "much," and "more than ten times" modifies "as much." Yes in general they all modify the subject, but is the concept "entire subject" really working?

2. If the concept of "entire subject" is correct, how should we understand the correct answer of the fee question as the following?

"More than three times as many independent institutions of higher education charge tuition and fees of under $8,000 a year as charge over $16,000."

The second half of this sentence does not have its own subject, so its subject should be the same as the subject of the first half, according to text books. But, what is the subject of the fist half? "independent institutions of higher education" or "more than three times as many independent institutions of higher education"? If we apply the concept of "the entire subject," the subject should be the latter--"more than three times as many independent institutions of higher education." But I think we will agree that this sentence would be illogical if the so-called "entire subject" is used for the second half.

3. If we apply the ellipsis pattern of the fee question to the wind power question, would it be correct to say "More than ten times as much energy is generated through wind power now as was in 1990"?


I know sometimes experts do not encourage us to compare different questions as the clues that can be used to eliminate options might be distinct in different questions. But I hope to learn more about omitted subjects by comparing these two questions, as I feel that GMAT quite often tests the "as...as" structure, and what makes the questions hard is often the omitted structure. Thank you very much if you could answer my questions when you have time.

Referencing the football question you showed, I think one possible explanation (may not be correct) is to consider whether 1) I don't think Ron's explanation of IT refers to the entire subject is correct. 2) although not the first thought, the first part of the comparison from a meaning standpoint, seems to indicate the energy produced "NOW", which is compared against energy produced "BEFORE", as a result, "IT" is not the best choice here. 3) also IT may refer to windpower. 4) regarding the question you raised on [would it be correct to say "More than ten times as much energy is generated through wind power now as was in 1990"?], I honestly think this is correct as it just compares two different periods, but I can clearly see the contradiction with the current question. Anyways.

Thanks for your response.
I feel that I raised a question that cannot be explained with clear grammatical rules as it involves the complicated usage of English language.

I also have doubts for Ron's explanation of "it"--the so called "entire subject" concept. This concept helps me greatly with other questions in which I need to choose between the pronouns "it" or "that," but not with this question. If I accept this concept with all my heart, I will have difficulty dealing with another question (https://reurl.cc/RjaYog.) The correct answer of that question will carry a strange meaning if we use the "entire subject" concept.

I have to say that I disagree with your second point. The original sentence is "energy is generated through wind power now"--the word "now" is placed after the verb, so "now" should modify the verb "be generated" rather than the subject "energy." If our sentence were "Last year's attendance was ten thousand greater than it was this year," the use of "it" would be incorrect, since"it" would refer to "last year's attendance," so it would be illogical to say "last year's attendance was this year" in the second half of the sentence.

But I agree with your third point--pronoun ambiguity, and thank you so much for pointing this out. I did not think the ambiguity issue seriously as sometimes GMAT tolerates pronoun ambiguity. But this explanation is clearer than the "entire subject" concept....

*

An expert has pointed out that the correct answer of this question is "pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable and logical," and another expert has said that he does not think the use of "it" is wrong but since two options use "it" meanwhile and there cannot be two correct answers, he chose the option (C). Overall, I think this question might be a bit controversial, and I decided to put it aside and focus on other SC topics first. Maybe one day experts will give clear explanations, or maybe one day when I review this question, I could have a better insight into it.

By the way, I call this question and three other questions--that question whose link I attached above, and the other two questions (https://reurl.cc/6EAKnO) (https://reurl.cc/qOMGeN)--the hardest among all comparison questions, as they seem to involve special usages.

Thanks for your response once again!

Hello, GraceSCKao. I have been silently observing this recent dialogue between you and others because I have not been called in to comment. I was curious, though, about the three questions you linked to, so I followed the mini-urls. (I am not sure what kind of link command that may be, but it works.) I saw all three questions as straightforward comparisons. The only one I had not seen was the first, and I may have spoiled an Exam Pack question, but oh well. I answered that one in 34 seconds. The second I answered in just over 40 seconds, and the third one, the Easy one, I spent almost a minute on the first time around. (Just eyeballing it, I answered in about 20 seconds.) Would you like me to create a thread dedicated to those three questions so I can discuss them? What are your specific concerns? (Feel free to PM me to avoid cluttering up this thread.)

- Andrew
_________________

NP. Actually, if you go to the manhattan prep post for the same question, somebody actually asked the exact same FOOTBALL question to Ron, and I have to say Ron's approach to comparison(IE. don't think about omitted words) is very different from mine and most people's in general. I don't have time to study his approach, and I feel it could completely mess up my understanding of solving comparison questions, but if interested you can take a look.

"it" refers to the exact same instance of a noun, whereas "that" refers to a different instance of that 'type' of noun. For example, we can say "the sun is one-third as hot as it was a billion years ago"; but we can't say "the sun is one-third as hot as that was a billion years ago". Conversely, we can say "Our galaxy's sun is one-third as hot as that of Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy"; but we can't say "Our galaxy's sun is one-third as hot as it of Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy"

That's why I eliminate (B) and (D) in the wind question. You can't say "twice as much energy is generated now as it was in 1980", because it's not the same energy being generated (the energy generated in 1980 has probably already been used). You can say "twice as much energy is generated now as that generated in 1980".

I'd like to commend you, GraceSCKao, for spotting this inconsistency. You're absolutely right, and you should continue to search for such inconsistencies, because they usually point to an incorrect elimination.

Yes, that's correct.


This is the right approach, keep it up! And, keep in mind that while the subject can be omitted, it doesn't have to be omitted. You'll obviously never be required to choose between two answer choices that differ only in the presence/absence of the subject. Find other reasons to eliminate four answer choices

Hi AndrewN,

Thanks for your response. I did not tag you in my first post as I noticed that in a previous post, you have shared your ideas about the options and how you arrived at the correct option (C). I would adopt your approach in the real test if I run into a question in which I find two options seem ideal at the same time, but since I hoped to know more about whether the use of "it" is legit, I tagged some other experts who have not commented on this question.

I envy your fast answering speed and would be happy to know your approach. I am working on the "more...than" structure right now, so I might create the thread later when I move on to the topic. Would be happy if you could give me some insights.

But I could still share some quick thoughts about the questions here. For this question, we have a clear subject "it" in the second half of the comparison structure, but the use of "it" is not correct. What bothers me the most in other three questions is the missed subject in the second half.

1. According to a 1996 survey by the National Association of College and University Business Officers, more than three times as many independent institutions of higher education charge tuition and fees of under $8,000 a year as charge over $16,000.
-> correct answer with a missed subject
-> If we are to "borrow" a subject from the first half, which part do we borrow? "institutions of higher education" or "three times as many institutions"? The second carries a strange meaning but this is what we get if we apply the "entire subject" concept mentioned by a few experts.

2. According to a study by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, companies in the United States are providing job training and general education for nearly eight million people, about as many as are enrolled in the nation’s four-year colleges and universities.
-> correct answer with a missed subject
-> Should we read this version as elliptical: as many as [people] are enrolled in the four-year colleges?

3. Scientists have found signs that moving water changed the chemical makeup of the surface of Mars in recent eras and have therefore concluded that the planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water as previously thought.
-> correct answer with a missed subject
-> Again, what is the subject in the second half? Some experts say "scientists" as in "scientists previously thought" while some say an impersonal "it" as in "it was previously thought."

Andrew, I don't really have a mania for grammar, but these elliptical structures have given me a hard time. Sometimes I could use other issues to eliminate options, but sometimes I could not do so. And sometimes I reject a correct answer just because I do not know how it could be right. Hence, I hope to learn more about ellipsis. But I also know that this topic might be more complicated than other SC topics, especially those with clear "rules," and I can always work on other topics even though my doubts on ellipsis remain.....

Hi avigutman,

Thank you so much for your response and clear explanations!
I thought I knew the difference between "it" and "that," but your explanation shows another level of understanding about how the pronoun "it" works.

I previously thought that the pronoun "it" refers to the exact subject, while "that" refers to a similar or a "new copy" of the subject. (Or, in an expert's words, "it" refers to the subject with all of its modifiers, and "that" refers to the same noun without the modifiers.) I knew that we could not say "Last year's revenue was higher than it was in 2020," because the pronoun "it" would refer to "last year's revenue" exactly. But I thought that it might be okay to say "As much energy is generated through wind power now as it was in 1990," since "it" would refer to the exact subject "energy."

But you pointed out another issue: the energy that is generated now should not be the same as the energy that was generated in 1990. So, the use of the pronoun "it" would be incorrect, and the use of "that" would be fit. This point makes sense to me, but I also feel that if we review SC questions by this standard, the use of "it" might be limited to only a few cases.

This discussion might become a bit more about philosophy from now on--but I often wonder whether something at the present is the same as the thing in the past. When we talk about some statistical gauges such as GDP, population, exports, the production level and oil prices, should we use "it" or "that" to refer to the gauge in the past? For example, if we want to say "The nation's GDP is likely to be lower this year than last year," do we say "than it was last year" or "than that last year"? Similarly, if we want to say that the crude oil prices would continue to rise, do we say "the prices would be higher than they were a month earlier" or "higher than those a month ago"?

Before running into this wind power question, I refrained from thinking about these issues, because I felt that OG does not have a clear guidance, as shown by the following two official questions, and that I could use other issues to eliminate options. But since this wind power question does require a test taker to have a clear understanding of "it," I hope to learn more about the use of this pronoun.

1. Prices at the producer level are only 1.3 percent higher now than those of a year ago and are going down, even though floods in the Midwest and drought in the south are hurting crops and therefore raising corn and soybean prices.

2. Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than they were last year. ->I think it could be read as "than they were last year."

Another official question also has an interesting use of "it":

3. Even with the proposed budget cuts and new taxes and fees, the city's projected deficit for the next budget year is getting worse: administration officials announced that they believe the gap will be $3.7 billion, a billion dollars more than they had predicted just two months ago.
-> The correct answer does not use "it," but the official explanation says that since the comparison is between the deficit amount predicted earlier and the deficit amount predicted later, either "the gap will be more than it was predicted to be" or "the gap will be more than was predicted" would be correct.
->But, I am not sure whether an amount predicted two months ago should be the same thing as the amount predicted just today? Or, both "that" and "it" are fine?


My question might be a bit too detailed and long--thank you very much if you could answer them.

GraceSCKao both of these sentences refer to prices that are changing over time. From the first sentence we can see that "those" is used, indicating that a price, once it has changed, is considered to be a different instance of type 'price' from the previous price. This makes sense, mathematically. Based on that, I'd say that the second sentence should be read as "than the heating-oil prices last year". I think the question of whether a changing price is still the same price or a different instance of type 'price' is arguable, but, importantly, the GMAT doesn't force us to make that determination in either of those official problems.

In this case I think it's not arguable. "it" doesn't refer to "amount"; "it" refers to "gap". And, the gap is definitely the same gap (the deficit). The gap isn't changing here: the prediction (of the size of the deficit) is changing.

Hello again, GraceSCKao. As promised, I dedicated a new thread to your multi-question queries. Perhaps it will help you and others. Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew
_________________

Thank you avigutman and AndrewN!
And sorry for my late response. I had password issues these days.

Avigutman, thank you for your explanation on the pronoun "it." It makes sense that the gap isn't changing, but the prediction (of the size of the deficit) is changing. So now I could understand why it is okay to say "the gap will be more than it was predicted to be."

Andrew, thank you so much for the post!!! It is so detailed--appreciate your time and your insights on the questions! Would definitely check it!

hi!
While 'as was the case' in the correct choice (C) makes the sentence very clear, using
' more than ten times as much energy is generated through wind power now as was in 1990.' will also be correct, right?

No. "Was" doesn't have a subject in this version.

is energy not the subject of was? if not, can you pls explain why? It'll help a lot

thanks!

RonTargetTestPrep