GMATNinja
oasis90
GMATNinja
I promised that I’d come back to the comparison in (B), so here it is again, right next to (E):
The comparison error at the beginning of (E) is pretty darned subtle: “the cost of running nuclear plants is about the same as other types of power plants…” Wait, no. We’re trying to compare the COSTS of running the two types of plants, but (E) literally compares the costs of running nuclear plants to the other plants themselves. That doesn’t work.
The version in (B) (“the cost of running nuclear plants is about the same as for other types of power plants”) might not be perfect, but it’s definitely better: the use of the preposition makes it clear that we’re comparing the costs of running nuclear plants with the corresponding costs “for other types of plants.” Fair enough.
You could also argue that the second half of the sentence is clearer in (B) than in (E). (B) is in active voice and more direct: “the fixed costs… make the electricity… more expensive.” (E), on the other hand is passive: “the electricity… is made more expensive because of the fixed costs stemming from building nuclear plants.” (E) isn’t necessarily WRONG in this section, but it’s definitely not as clear and direct as (B).
So (B) is our answer.
If I were to fill in the omitted words in the compariosn in B, would the sentence be "The cost of running nuclear plants is about the same as the cost of running for other types of power plants"? It sounds a bit clumsy. is the FOR okay there?
Boiled way down, we're comparing the "cost of x" to the "cost for y." The change in prepositions is incidental. We just want to make sure x and y are logical things to compare.
In this case, we'd end up with "The cost of running nuclear power plants is about the same as the cost for running for other types of power plants." Sounds fine to me. More importantly, it's a perfectly logical comparison.
I hope that helps!
Hi
GMATNinja , I have literally spent the whole day reading this thread to find my answer but I have not found one that solves my problems.
As a result I am really frustrated right now and i am begging for you help
My FIRST problem is :
As you said, in B, we're comparing the "The cost of running nuclear power plants" and "the cost for running for other types of power plants."
we could see that "for" replaces " of running" in the second part of parallelism here, and you said that the change in prepositions makes sense here.
BUT the parallelism in D-which is wrong as you all said- changes prepositions as well ! I could not understand why the the change in prepositions makes sense in B but doesn't in D!
D: It costs about the same to run nuclear plants as for other types of power plants
Isn't "for" replace "to run" in D just as it replaces " of running" in B ?
I know that there are other problems in D for us to eliminate it but i just want to figure out the parallelism here.
My SECOND problem is :
An expert in this thread think that "for" is just a
connection to connect "that"-which is a replacement for "of running"-and "other types of power plants."
But in your post, you said for is a substitute instead of a connection after "of running"
I think your interpretation is kind of contrary to his and I really don't know which interpretation I should take.
Could you please explain that ?
Thanks in advance !!!!!
Looking forward to your reply!
egmat
Very interesting question Himanshu.
When you are dealing with ellipsis, it always helps to begin from the completely expanded version with all the words and then move your way to the abbreviated version by applying ellipsis along the way. I will do the same here:
Let's consider only the pertinent portion of the sentence.
1. The cost of running nuclear plants is about the same as the cost of running other types of power plants.No issues here with the comparison. Both sides of the comparison are grammatically and logically parallel.
Now what if I replace "the cost of running" with "that". After it is obvious that we are comparing cost of running of the two categories of plants. But when I apply this ellipsis, I need something to connect "that" with "other types of power plants".
2.
(Without connection with that)The cost of running nuclear plants is about the same as
that other types of power plants.
WRONG2.
(with correct connection) The cost of running nuclear plants is about the same as that for other types of power plants.So this is where the preposition "for" comes from.
Now we continue with our ellipsis. We can indeed even omit "that" from here since this omission will not lead to any ambiguity.
3.
The cost of running nuclear plants is about the same as for other types of power plants.So this is how I get to the correct sentence containing "for".
Now let's apply the same on the set of sentences:
1.
The incidence of the disease among men exceeds the incidence of the disease among women.1 to 2 - The incidence of the disease among men exceeds the incidence
of the disease among women.
2.
The incidence of the disease among men exceeds the incidence among women.2 to 3 - The incidence of the disease among men exceeds
the incidence among women.
3.
The incidence of the disease among men exceeds that among women.
So the key thing here is that as you replace or omit words, think about what connections you may need to get the correct sentence. The nature of the two sentences is different. In the Official sentence, the main component - cost of running - took direct object without the need of any preposition. So when we replaced this with "that" we needed a connection - i.e. a preposition. However, in the other example, the main component - incidence of the disease - itself needed a preposition to connect to the object and hence when we replaced it with "that" we did not need to get another preposition.
Thus when you cross-check your work in ellipsis, start from the complete sentence and then work your way to simplified version with replacement words and omitted words.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Payal