Financial uncertainties from the accident at Three Mile Island may pro

Question

Financial uncertainties  from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry than political opposition is .

(A) from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry than political opposition is
(B) from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove to be even more serious a deterrent to the nuclear industry than political opposition
(C) from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove to be an even more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry than political opposition
(D) resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove to be an even more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry than is political opposition
(E) resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry than political opposition

SC52561.01

JonShukhrat · Accepted Answer

(I received a pm)

Well, you don't need to completely understand the exact usage of the all words in order to solve this question, including transitive vs. intransitive issue. Whenever you see a comparison, check the parallelism and ambiguity. Once again, you see a comparison –> you quickly check for parallelism and meaning. This will kick off at least two choices.

A. “is” at the end of the sentence is parallel to nothing that comes before. In other words, you need any form of “to be” on the left side of a comparison that is parallel to “is” on the right side. But there is no “to be” before “than”. For example, D has “to be” on the left of comparison, and that “to be” is parallel to “is” at the end. Thus D has correct parallelism but A doesn’t. A is out.

B and C. Remember, whenever you see any preposition before X in the construction “X than Y”, you need either to repeat that preposition or to repeat the verb, depending on the meaning. For example:

- A is more close to X than Y.

This comparison is ambiguous because of preposition “to”. You have to say one of the below, depending on the meaning:

- A is more close to X than to Y.
- A is more close to X than is Y. (meaning: A is more close to X than Y is close to X)

The two sentences above totally differ in meaning. In our case, the meaning of the question requires the latter of the above. That’s because we are comparing what is a more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry. So, we have:

- A proves to be a more serious deterrent to X than is Y. (“to be” is parallel to “is”)
The implied meaning: A proves that A is a more serious deterrent to X than is Y. (is = is)

So, B and C miss “is” at the end, even though either has “to be” on the left. Therefore, we don’t know what B and C actually mean. B and C are out.

E doesn’t have “to be” on the left side, so there is no need for “is” on the right side either. However, after “than” we still need to repeat a certain verb that is parallel to the verb on the left side, for example:

- Uncertainties may prove a more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry than political opposition may (prove)
- Uncertainties may prove a more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry than political opposition does (prove)

E misses both of the above, so it’s ambiguous. E is out.

D has correct parallelism and unambiguous meaning.

Extra: “uncertainties from the accident” and “uncertainties resulting from the accident” are both correct even though the latter is clearer. But eliminating answer choices basing on word choice (because one of choices sound better) is a hasty mistake. We have more serious problems to tackle first, such as grammar. In addition, “prove X” and “prove to be X” are both correct. Once again, you can see that eliminating answer choices because of word choice is not a good thing.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Transitive vs. intransitive: https://gmatclub.com/forum/eminent-econ ... 28-80.html

In the above thread, we spent crazy amount of time on discussing transitive vs. intransitive issue. How dare you forget it? :-D
Knowing “transitive /intransitive” always helps me clarify whether a VERBING is a noun or an adjective. That’s important.

What do you think “deterring” is in “uncertainties may serve even more deterring to the nuclear industry” ? Noun or adjective?

Well, “decrease” can be both transitive and intransitive. In the construction “A decreases B”, either A or B can perform the action “decrease”. In other words you can say “A decreases B” or “B decreases”. For example: “the company decreased the prices” or “the prices decreased”. That’s why, “decrease” is both tra. and intra.

However, “reduce” is only transitive. In other words, you can say “the company reduced the prices”. But you CANNOT say “The prices reduced”. Because prices can’t reduce themselves - only somebody or something can reduce prices. Or you can say “the high prices reduced the demand”. But, once again, you CANNOT say “the demand reduced”. You have to say “the demand decreased” or “something reduced the demand”.

Because “decrease” is both tra and intra, “decreasing” can be either a noun or an adjective, for example:
- Decreasing the number of workers was a bad idea. (Noun. What was a bad idea? Decreasing the number of workers was.)
- Decreasing applications force business schools to grant even more scholarships. (Adjective. what kind of applications? Decreasing applications)

Because “reduce” is only transitive, “reducing” can be only a noun (when used without a doer), not an adjective.
- Reducing the number of workers was a bad idea. (Noun. What was a bad idea? Reducing the number of workers was.)
- ~~Reducing applications~~... (Incorrect)

Similarly and finally: “deter” is a transitive verb. A can deter B, but B CANNOT deter itself. You can say “high walls can deter an enemy attack”, but you CANNOT say “an enemy attack can deter” because an attack can’t deter itself. Hence, “deterring” can be only a noun, not an adjective, for example:
- Deterring an enemy attack is the main purpose of this wall. (Noun. What is the main purpose? Deterring an enemy attack is)
- ~~Deterring walls~~...

Conclusion: Since “deterring“ can only be a noun, A and E have an illogical meaning. The meaning of the construction “uncertainties may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry” requires “deterring” to be an adjective, or sound as “uncertainties may prove even more threatening (scary, unpleasant) to the nuclear industry”. But that’s not possible because “deterring” can only be a noun.

Since “deterring” is a noun, you also can’t say “more deterring” in that sentence. In other words, you can’t say “Fuji is a more apple than any other apple”. That’s illogical. You need an adjective: “Fuji is a tastier apple than any other apple”.

To sum up, you first need the right noun form of “deter”. It’s “deterrent”, not “deterring”. Next, you need an adjective to make sense. So you say “something is a more serious deterrent than another thing”, as does D.

Phew!

EMPOWERgmatVerbal · Answer

Hello Everyone!

Let's tackle this question, one thing at a time, and narrow down our options quickly so we know how to answer questions like this when they pop up on the GMAT! To begin, let's take a quick look at the question and highlight any major differences between the options in  orange :

Financial uncertainties  from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry than political opposition is.

(A)  from  the accident at Three Mile Island may prove  even more deterring  to the nuclear industry than  political opposition is 
(B)  from  the accident at Three Mile Island may prove  to be even more serious a deterrent  to the nuclear industry than  political opposition 
(C)  from  the accident at Three Mile Island may prove  to be an even more serious deterrent  to the nuclear industry than  political opposition 
(D)  resulting from  the accident at Three Mile Island may prove  to be an even more serious deterrent  to the nuclear industry than  is political opposition 
(E)  resulting from  the accident at Three Mile Island may prove  even more deterring  to the nuclear industry than  political opposition

After a quick glance over the options, we have a few key differences we can focus on to narrow down our choices:

1. from / resulting from
2. deterrent / deterring
3. political opposition is / political opposition / is political opposition

Let's start with #1 on our list: from vs. resulting from.  No matter which one we go with, we'll eliminate 2-3 options rather quickly. While you can certainly use either "from" or "resulting from" in this sentence, one of them is slightly clearer than the other:

Financial uncertainties  from  the accident = might lead readers to think they existed the whole time, or that financial uncertainties were located at the accident
Financial uncertainties  resulting from  the accident = more clearly shows cause & effect relationship, rather than location/ownership

We can rule out options A, B, & C because "from" isn't as clear as "resulting from."

Now that we have it narrowed down to only 2 options, let's tackle both #2 & #3 on our list.  The deterrent / deterring split has to do with whether or not you want to use the word as a noun or a verb. #3 on the list has to do with parallelism. Here's how they break down:

(D) resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove  to be  an even more serious  deterrent  to the nuclear industry than  is political opposition

This option is  CORRECT . First, it uses "deterrent" as a noun, which works better here than in option E, where it's being used as a verb. Second, the phrases "to be an even more serious deterrent" and "is political opposition" are parallel because they both start with some form of the verb "to be."

(E) resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove  even more deterring  to the nuclear industry than  political opposition

This option is  INCORRECT  for a couple reasons. First, it uses the transitive verb "deterring" incorrectly. Transitive verbs only work if they take an object, or are the action being done to something. Second, the phrases "even more deterring to the nuclear industry" and "political opposition" aren't parallel - the second phrase would need a verb to go with it.

There you have it - option D is the correct choice!  By focusing on either/or splits, we can narrow down our choices rather quickly!

Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.

Sanjay7392 · Answer

After comparing the options, we can eliminate B,C and E because - "to the nuclear industry than political opposition" could mean that financial uncertainties could deter both nuclear industry and political opposition.

In actual we need to say that financial uncertainty deters nuclear industry than political opposition deters the nuclear industry. Hence the usage of 'is' is absolutely necessary to avoid this confusion.

For A vs D,

I try this way of solving by completing the sentence to make it more simpler to understand:

A) Financial uncertainties from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry than political opposition is

This statement is incorrect because in my opinion " does " is the right word to be used in this context in comparison to " is ". Because "Political Opposition is prove less deterring to nuclear industry " is incorrect.

On the other hand

D) Financial uncertainties resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove to be an even more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry than is political opposition.

This statement is right. Because the usage of " is " is along with " to be " and " is " is preferred in this context to " does ".

D is the right answer

Please correct me if my way of solving this is incorrect.

anud33p · Answer

In general, I do believe the verb form is more elegant than the noun form but in this case, I don't think deterring is better than deterrent. I almost eliminated A & E on that basis. I think the major split lies in what is being compared - 
Cutting the fluff, E effectively says the financial difficulties may be more deterring to the  nuclear industry  than  political opposition . There is a lot of Ambiguity here - Is it deterring to the nuclear industry or the political opposition? 
 D  addresses this ambiguity by adding an  is .

The answer should be D.

gmatt1476 · Answer

Official Explanation

Grammatical construction; Parallelism

First, deterring to the nuclear industry is not correct, as deter is a transitive verb and requires a direct object. Furthermore, while prove does not have to be followed by to be, here to be is required for parallelism with political opposition is. Finally, even though financial uncertainties from is not strictly incorrect, financial uncertainties resulting from would be clearer.

A. This choice is flawed for the reasons above.

B. As worded, this choice can be read as comparing the degree to which the financial uncertainties are a deterrent with the degree to which the financial uncertainties are political opposition. To fix this, we must insert the verb is either before or after political opposition. Furthermore, the sentence would be clearer if it said resulting from. Finally, even more serious a deterrent would more appropriately read an even more serious deterrent.

C. The comparison is again faulty as in choice B. Also, the sentence would be clearer if it said resulting from.

D. Correct. This choice clearly conveys the intended meaning. While it is possible to argue that is would be better placed after political opposition, it is technically correct in either place. Realistically, this issue is minor compared to those in each of the other choices.

E. Deterring to the nuclear industry is not correct, as deter is a transitive verb and requires a direct object.

The correct answer is D.

BelalHossain046 · Answer

IMO, the main issue here is  whether we need an AUXILIARY verb (or not) in the second part of the comparison   ?

Two options have AUXILIARY verbs in the second segment of comparison (a & d) and three options don't (b,c,d).

WHEN we need an AUXILIARY verb in the second part of the comparison  
If there is any chance od DOUBLE meaning & tense mismatch, we must include an AUXILIARY verb in the second part of the comparison.

For example, I love dogs more than my wife. 
This sentence has two meanings.
(1) I love two things (dog and my wife) and I love dogs more than I love my wife.
(2) I and my wife love dogs and I love dogs more than she loves dogs.
So, this sentence requires an auxiliary verb in the second segment of comparison to ensure the same meaning to all. 
Correction: I love dogs more than my wife does. or I love dogs more than I do my wife.

Back to the question  
Financial uncertainty maybe even more discouraging to the nuclear industry than political opposition. 
This sentence has TWO meanings. 
(1) Financial uncertainty is problematic........
 (a) to the nuclear industry and
 (b) to political opposition.
 and Financial uncertainty is more problematic to the nuclear industry than to political opposition.

(2) Both (a) Financial uncertainty and (b) political opposition are discouraging to the nuclear industry.
 Financial uncertainty is more discouraging to the nuclear industry.

Since this sentence provides DOUBLE meaning, we must include an AUXILIARY verb in the second part of the comparison. .

So, B, C & E OUT. 
So, Answer A or D

Now a vs d.
Auxiliary in the second segment of comparison must be matched with the auxiliary verb of first segment. 
In other words, if I want to use a BE verb in the second segment, another BE verb must be available in the first segment.

Here in option A, SECOND segment of comparison has a BE verb (is). But, there is no be verb in first segment. So, option A is out.

In option D, SECOND segment of comparison has a BE verb (is). And there is a BE verb in first segment. So, option D followed the auxiliary verb rule.

Option D is my answer.

P.S. than IS political opposition=than political opposition IS

mykrasovski · Answer

Hi  GMATNinjaTwo , thanks for your reply. I guess I accidentally removed the part which I wanted to ask... Sorry.

I was able to eliminate options (A), (B), and (C), but got stuck between (D) and (E). The explanation by one of the experts is not helpful because he jusitifies (E), which is wrong. Clearly, deterring is not a verb.

Would (E) be correct if it had "than political opposition is"?

Also, I cannot fully understand the comparison pieces in (D). I guess smth may prove to be more serious to nuclear industry than political opposition is?

(D) resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove to be an even more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry than is political opposition

(E) resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry than political opposition

egmat · Answer

Hello mykrasovski , Although your question is not directed to me, here is my explanation for your question.

Choice E is certainly incorrect because the missing verb in the second part of the comparison makes the comparison ambiguous. The way Choice E is phrased, we can infer two meanings/comparisons: Comparison 1: Financial uncertainties may prove more deterring to the nuclear industry than is political opposition. Compared entities: Financial uncertainties and political opposition. Comparison 2: Financial uncertainties may prove more deterring to the nuclear industry than to political opposition. Compared entities: nuclear industry and political opposition. Choices A & D are the only two answer choices that present the unambiguous comparison between Financial uncertainties and political opposition. But Choice A has faults. Hence, Choice D is the correct answer choice. Hope this helps.

Thanks. Shraddha

KarishmaB · Answer

"Financial uncertainties from the accident" is extremely unclear. I don't understand what it means. 
"Financial uncertainties resulting from the accident" makes a whole lot more sense. Now I know that we are talking about the financial setback due to the accidental damage. So I will directly go to (D) and (E).

(D) - .... A may prove to be an even more serious deterrent than is B... (Correct)
(E) - .... A may prove even more deterring than B (incorrect usage since deter is used with an object. It automatically sounds wrong, doesn't it?)
Th usage is "The scarecrow deterred birds (object)."

(A) has both issues.

KarishmaB · Answer

This is the structure of the sentence:

A may prove to be an even more serious B than is C.

A is a noun and since A may prove to be B, B should be a noun too. Hence, you need to use 'deterrent', the noun form.

Also, you need 'is' before C. Otherwise it may seem that comparison is between B and C. But actually the comparison is between A and C.

'Financial uncertainties' may be a bigger deterrent than is 'political opposition' - the comparison is between 'Financial uncertainties' and 'political opposition'.

Hence, (D) is correct.

dharam9610 · Answer

KarishmaB · Answer

'deter' when used as a verb needs an object. Even if we try to rewrite and do away with 'to be', we don't have an object. 
With 'to be' we need a noun here.

gmatassassin88 · Answer

VeritasKarishma

AjiteshArun   GMATNinja   DmitryFarber  : Your inputs would be appreciated

In your above explanation for option E, you have stated  incorrect usage since deter is used with an object .

I agree in the example quoted  The scarecrow deterred birds (object). " deter is used as a verb & therefore 'birds' is object here. However in option E 'deterring' is not acting as a verb rather 'may prove' is a verb for Subject ( Financial uncertainities).Then why we need to have object afer deterring.As per my understanding 'Deterring' is an adjective .

SecondlY, even if 'deterring' is a verb here then is not 'deterrent' a verb in option D.Also in option D 'to be' is used.Please share the significance of 'TO BE' here & why it is important to have.

Please clear the gap in my understanding.

KarishmaB · Answer

'deter' is a verb which needs an object. 'deter' means to discourage someone from doing something or prevent something. 
You could use deterring as a present participle but by its very definition it will be used with an object.

A took action B, deterring war. 
When you say it will prevent or is preventing, there has to be something it will prevent.

Here you need the noun form. 
A may prove to be a deterrent. Then you wouldn't need an object because you are saying A is a deterrent to something.

GMATIntensive · Answer

Sentence Analysis

https://www.thegmatco.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/5.png

The sentence seems to compare two deterrents to the nuclear industry:

1. Financial uncertainties from an accident Political opposition
2. The sentence says the first one may prove to be a bigger deterrent than the second one is.

The sentence has the following problems:

1. The verb ‘deter’ is a transitive verb and thus needs a direct object. The given sentence doesn’t have a direct object for ‘deter’.
2. While the construction ‘financial uncertainties from the accident’ is not wrong, ‘financial uncertainties resulting from the accident’ is a better construction.

Option Analysis

A.  from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry than political opposition is 
 Incorrect . For the reasons mentioned above.

B.  from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove to be even more serious a deterrent to the nuclear industry than political opposition 
 Incorrect . For the following reasons:
  The comparison is not clear. Here the comparison could be between any of the two combinations:
  ‘Financial uncertainties’ and ‘political opposition’ (the most logical meaning) 
 ‘A deterrent’ and ‘political opposition’   
 The phrase ‘even more serious a deterrent’ is better phrased as ‘an even more serious deterrent’. 
 The second issue of the original sentence.

C.  from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove to be an even more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry than political opposition  
 Incorrect . This option repeats the first error of option B and the second issue of the original sentence.

D.  resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove to be an even more serious deterrent to the nuclear industry than is political opposition  
 Correct .

E.  resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island may prove even more deterring to the nuclear industry than political opposition  
 Incorrect . For the following reasons:
  The first error of the original sentence 
 The comparison is ambiguous. The following two comparisons are possible:
  “Financial uncertainties” compared with “political opposition” 
 “Nuclear industry” compared with “political opposition”

vatsal323 · Answer

Financial uncertainties is plural but "even more serious a deterrent" - this phrase is singular. How does this make sense?

VeritasKarishma  & others - please help!

EducationAisle · Answer

Hi Vatsal, you ask a good question. Basically, one way to look at it is that "Financial uncertainties" as  a category  is a serious deterrent.

This is equivalent to:

Poisonous snakes are a menace .

Notice that this is  not  a subject-verb agreement issue:  Poisonous snakes  is a plural subject and hence, we use the plural verb  are . However, since we are talking about the  category  of Poisonous snakes, we use singular noun  a menace , almost like a  modifier .

Test takers need to be comfortable with this kind of construct, since there are numerous official questions that use this construct.

Couple of them are cited below:

Providing initial evidence that  airports are a larger source of pollution  than they were once believed to be, environmentalists in Chicago report that the total amount of pollutant emitted annually by vehicles at O'Hare International Airport is twice  that emitted annually by all  motor vehicles in the Chicago metropolitan area. 
- Notice again that this is not a subject-verb agreement issue. Plural noun  airports  matches with plural verb  are ; however, the modifier  a larger source of pollution  is singular.

The Federalist papers, a strong defense  of the US constitution as well as  an important body of work in political science, represent  the handiwork of three different authors. 
- Notice again that this is not a subject-verb agreement issue. Plural noun  the Federalist papers  matches with plural verb  represent ; however, the modifier  a strong defense  is singular.

pk6969 · Answer

Hi! In D what is "is" referring to? I mean is an to be form and there is no to be form before. So, how should we read D? "than is political opposition proving"? 
Also, What makes A wrong and D right. Is it the placement of is? Please help  IanStewart   AndrewN

AndrewN · Answer

Hello,  pk6969 . Concerning answer choice (D), I think you are overlooking  may prove to be , and this verb form helps us qualify  is : we are to understand that X may prove to be a more serious deterrent than Y  . Looking at the same comparison in the original sentence, we would get the following: X may prove even more deterring than Y is  . The former comparison (by which I mean the one in (D)) follows a standard verb-to-verb construct, and in this case, the author has decided that ellipsis would not make the sentence as clear. The latter comparison, with its -ing construct, lacks a direct object to tell what, exactly, is being deterred. For example, you could write that a road closure was deterring someone from getting home, but you could not simply state that a road closure was  deterring .

I hope that helps clarify the matter. Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew

Financial uncertainties from the accident at Three Mile Island may pro

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

Financial uncertainties from the accident at Three Mile Island may pro

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