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

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.....

There are hopeful signs that we are shifting away from our heavy reliance on fossil fuels: more than ten times as much energy is generated through wind power now than it was in 1990

A) generated through wind power now than it was
B) generated through wind power now as it was
C) generated through wind power now as was the case
D) now generated through wind power as it was
E) now generated through wind power than was the case

My Answer : E

There are hopeful signs that we are shifting away from our heavy reliance on fossil fuels: more than ten times as much energy is generated through wind power now than it was in 1990

A) generated through wind power now than it was
B) generated through wind power now as it was
C) generated through wind power now as was the case
D) now generated through wind power as it was
E) now generated through wind power than was the case

Hi IanStewart and AjiteshArun

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.

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!

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!

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

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

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 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.

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."

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?

Could anyone help me understanding the reasoning used in the following question:

Q: There are hopeful signs that we are shifting away from our heavy reliance on fossil fuels: more than ten times as much energy is generated through wind power now than it was in 1990
A) generated through wind power now than it was
B) generated through wind power now as it was
C) generated through wind power now as was the case
D) now generated through wind power as it was
E) now generated through wind power than was the case

Thanks in advance.

idiom: as much ..as
D,E --out

it --> ambiguous..
it can refer to energy/wind power ..
A,B --out

C is perfect and parallel.

ten times as much "energy is generated...." now than as was the case<energy generated .. through wind pwoer.> in 1990

Hi kinjiGC,

Thanks for posting your doubt here.

So basically why "as it was..." is incorrect in the context of this sentence. It is so because "it" refers to "more than ten times as much energy". It is so because in such constructions, the modifiers related to a referent noun CANNOT be left alone. So in Choices B and D. This obviously does not make sense as this reference leads to illogical comparison.

However, Choice C, this is not the case because "as was the case" refers to generation of energy in 1990.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
SJ