A decade after initiating the nation's most comprehensive an

[jnelson0612]

Great. :-)

[violetwind]

Hi,Ron, is there any difference in meaning between the two placement of the word "annual"?

annual per capital consumption of cigarettes decline from over 125 packs
vs.
per capital consuption of cigarettes declined from over 125 packs annually

thank you!

[RonPurewal]

Hi,Ron, is there any difference in meaning between the two placement of the word "annual"?

annual per capital consumption of cigarettes decline from over 125 packs
vs.
per capital consuption of cigarettes declined from over 125 packs annually

thank you!

not really. the second is sort of weird/awkward (it would be better written as "per year"), but, fortunately, weirdness/awkwardness is not an exclusive basis upon which any given answer will be incorrect.

the important thing here is to avoid redundancy -- i.e., you don't want to have both of these constructions.
for instance,
the rainfall in some parts of the atacama desert is less than one millimeter per year --> correct
the annual rainfall in some parts of the atacama desert is less than one millimeter --> correct
the annual rainfall in some parts of the atacama desert is less than one millimeter per year --> incorrect because of redundancy.

[violetwind]

Hi,Ron, is there any difference in meaning between the two placement of the word "annual"?

annual per capital consumption of cigarettes decline from over 125 packs
vs.
per capital consuption of cigarettes declined from over 125 packs annually

thank you!

not really. the second is sort of weird/awkward (it would be better written as "per year"), but, fortunately, weirdness/awkwardness is not an exclusive basis upon which any given answer will be incorrect.

the important thing here is to avoid redundancy -- i.e., you don't want to have both of these constructions.
for instance,
the rainfall in some parts of the atacama desert is less than one millimeter per year --> correct
the annual rainfall in some parts of the atacama desert is less than one millimeter --> correct
the annual rainfall in some parts of the atacama desert is less than one millimeter per year --> incorrect because of redundancy.

cleared! thank you!

[jnelson0612]

:-)

[nowwithgmat]

this is a very common error, so be sure that you can recognize it at once.

this sentence starts with a 'headless modifier' (headless in the sense that it doesn't have a subject). in sentences starting with such modifiers, the modifier MUST modify the noun immediately following the comma.

so, choice b implies that 'per-capita consumption of cigarettes' initiated the nation's most comprehensive antismoking program (clearly an absurdity). choice d, by contrast, correctly states that california initiated the program.

notice that the same consideration also eliminates choice a (which states that consumption initiated the program) and choice c (which states that CA's consumption initiated the program).

hello ron

California's annual per capita consumption of cigarettes declined from over 125 packs per person to about 60, more than twice as great as the drop

does bold portion in option C correct. if there any other error in option C except you told.

[jlucero]

hello ron

California's annual per capita consumption of cigarettes declined from over 125 packs per person to about 60, more than twice as great as the drop

does bold portion in option C correct. if there any other error in option C except you told.

This bolded portion is wrong b/c it compares a clause "cigarettes declined" to a thing "the drop". Answer D does a clear job of comparing two things by inserting a noun in the second part of the sentence: "a drop" more than twice as great as "that (a different drop"

[thanghnvn]

A decade after initiating the nation's most comprehensive and aggressive antismoking program, per capita consumption of cigarettes in California declined from over 125 packs annually per person to about 60, a drop more than twice as great as in the nation as a whole.
A) per capita consumption of cigarettes in California declined from over 125 packs annually per person to about 60, a drop more than twice as great as
B) annual per capita consumption of cigarettes in California declined from over 125 packs to about 60, more than twice as great as that
C) California's annual per capita consumption of cigarettes declined from over 125 packs per person to about 60, more than twice as great as the drop
D) California has seen per capita consumption of cigarettes decline from over 125 packs annually to about 60, a drop more than twice as great as that
E) California has seen annual per capita consumption of cigarettes decline from over 125 packs per person to about 60, more than twice as great as that

focung on meaing, I also go to correct D.
but I am confused,
what dose "annually"modifie?
"that" can not be used as stand alone pronoun. 'that" must be used in paralel structure. why " that " in D is used

it is possible that "that" can be used as stand alone pronoun but must refer to the noun different from the previous noun. "that" dose not need a parallel structure. Pls, confirm this point.

[jlucero]

A decade after initiating the nation's most comprehensive and aggressive antismoking program, per capita consumption of cigarettes in California declined from over 125 packs annually per person to about 60, a drop more than twice as great as in the nation as a whole.
A) per capita consumption of cigarettes in California declined from over 125 packs annually per person to about 60, a drop more than twice as great as
B) annual per capita consumption of cigarettes in California declined from over 125 packs to about 60, more than twice as great as that
C) California's annual per capita consumption of cigarettes declined from over 125 packs per person to about 60, more than twice as great as the drop
D) California has seen per capita consumption of cigarettes decline from over 125 packs annually to about 60, a drop more than twice as great as that
E) California has seen annual per capita consumption of cigarettes decline from over 125 packs per person to about 60, more than twice as great as that

focung on meaing, I also go to correct D.
but I am confused,
what dose "annually"modifie?
"that" can not be used as stand alone pronoun. 'that" must be used in paralel structure. why " that " in D is used

it is possible that "that" can be used as stand alone pronoun but must refer to the noun different from the previous noun. "that" dose not need a parallel structure. Pls, confirm this point.

Annually in this instance simply stands for "per year". There's no stated word that I see it would modify, but instead is implied that it modifies "consumed per person" from the previous clause. Good question, unusual example, strange quirks in the English language.

Because "that" usually takes the place of a long noun phrase, it usually doesn't involve parallelism. But the big error to avoid is making sure that "that" 's antecedent is acceptable in the second part of the sentence.

No: Jim's preference for brown shoes on rainy days is like that of John's on sunny days. (John's preference for brown shoes on rainy days on sunny days???)

Ok: No: Jim's preference for brown shoes on rainy days is like that of John's. (Jim & John both prefer brown shoes on rainy days)

[mcmebk]

Isn't "per capita consumption " and "packs per person " redundant in the wrong answer choices?

yes. (that point was addressed in the initial post on this thread, but it's worth mentioning again, i suppose)

I think answer choice "E" is wrong not because it doesn't contain "drop" but because of the reason cited above.

(emphasis mine)
the highlighted words in your post seemed to indicate that you think there can only be 1 error in an incorrect answer choice!
if you really do think that, you need to start un-thinking that right now -- lots and lots and lots of answer choices have multiple things wrong with them.

and, no, the modifier portion of choice (e) is definitely wrong -- in fact, it's wrong in two different ways!
* first, since the choice doesn't say "drop", the modifier seems to refer to the immediately preceding figure (i.e., the actual consumption rate of 60 packs per person, not the drop). if this choice weren't surrounded by other choices that give the correct meaning, it would be absolutely impossible to tell that this modifier is supposed to be talking about the drop.
* second, since the choice lacks the noun "drop", the pronoun "that", occurring later in the modifier, doesn't refer to anything at all. (note that this pronoun would have to stand for the word "drop" for this modifier to make any sense)

here's an analogy:
if i write
last summer my weight increased from 200 lbs to 220 lbs, more than twice as much as my little brother's
--> anyone and everyone reading this sentence is going to interpret it as "my little brother weighs less than 110 lbs"; absolutely nobody is going to infer "my brother gained 10 lbs or less over the course of that summer".
same thing here.


Because "more than twice as great as that" can refer to a abstract number in my opinion.Please correct me if I am wrong in assuming this.

[/quote][/quote]

Hi Ron

In this question: post20923.html there is a similar structure where comma, more than XXX is used.

More than 300 rivers drain into Siberia's Lake Baikal, which holds 20 percent of the world's fresh water, more than all the North American Great Lakes combined.

Your explanation is that "more than XXX" is an appositive structure, and in this case it stands for the clause "holding water" rather than "20 percent of world's fresh water" because it is nonsense to say water is more than all lakes combined.

When I read that explanation, I was telling myself to remember "More is a type of conceptual noun for appositive and should stand for the whole clause rather than the preceding noun", could you please explain why here it stands for the figure 60 in (E)?

Thank you for your help.

[RonPurewal]

When I read that explanation, I was telling myself to remember "More is a type of conceptual noun for appositive and should stand for the whole clause rather than the preceding noun", could you please explain why here it stands for the figure 60 in (E)?

Thank you for your help.

Lots of constructions can do more than one thing. This is one of them.

Remember, written language has to be capable of expressing every relationship that anyone might ever want to express. That's a pretty big task. If every construction worked in only one way, it just wouldn't happen.

[rajatvmittal]

Isn't "per capita consumption " and "packs per person " redundant in the wrong answer choices?

yes. (that point was addressed in the initial post on this thread, but it's worth mentioning again, i suppose)

I think answer choice "E" is wrong not because it doesn't contain "drop" but because of the reason cited above.

(emphasis mine)
the highlighted words in your post seemed to indicate that you think there can only be 1 error in an incorrect answer choice!
if you really do think that, you need to start un-thinking that right now -- lots and lots and lots of answer choices have multiple things wrong with them.

and, no, the modifier portion of choice (e) is definitely wrong -- in fact, it's wrong in two different ways!
* first, since the choice doesn't say "drop", the modifier seems to refer to the immediately preceding figure (i.e., the actual consumption rate of 60 packs per person, not the drop). if this choice weren't surrounded by other choices that give the correct meaning, it would be absolutely impossible to tell that this modifier is supposed to be talking about the drop.
* second, since the choice lacks the noun "drop", the pronoun "that", occurring later in the modifier, doesn't refer to anything at all. (note that this pronoun would have to stand for the word "drop" for this modifier to make any sense)

here's an analogy:
if i write
last summer my weight increased from 200 lbs to 220 lbs, more than twice as much as my little brother's
--> anyone and everyone reading this sentence is going to interpret it as "my little brother weighs less than 110 lbs"; absolutely nobody is going to infer "my brother gained 10 lbs or less over the course of that summer".
same thing here.


Because "more than twice as great as that" can refer to a abstract number in my opinion.Please correct me if I am wrong in assuming this.

[/quote][/quote]


I have a question on the example.

you seem to suggest that 'more than' clause modifies the noun '220lbs' and it can not modify the verb 'increase'. Can you please look at the link. In this sentence, slightly less than seems to modify the 'rise'. Can you please elaborate?

Link : - employment-costs-rose-2-8-percent-in-the-12-months-t6388.html

[RonPurewal]

you seem to suggest that 'more than' clause modifies the noun '220lbs' and it can not modify the verb 'increase'.

I'm not suggesting that.
I'm saying that the modifier is directly next to "220 lbs", and so everybody will, by default, interpret it as modifying "220 lbs".

If such an interpretation were impossible, then of course this kind of modifier could describe a change:
Last summer my pet fish gained 3 ounces, more than twice as much as my brother's. (My brother's pet fish gained less than 1.5 ounces.)

Can you please look at the link. In this sentence, slightly less than seems to modify the 'rise'. Can you please elaborate?

Yes"”in that sentence, there's nothing else that it could possibly describe.

[rajatvmittal]

thanks Ron! Let me generlize this - Less and more can act both as an adj or as an adverb. Hence, basis the context of the sentence, we need to make out whether 'less/more' is modifying the adjacent noun or a verb. Please correct if I am worng. Thanks for all the help!. Rajat

[RonPurewal]

thanks Ron! Let me generlize this - Less and more can act both as an adj or as an adverb. Hence, basis the context of the sentence, we need to make out whether 'less/more' is modifying the adjacent noun or a verb. Please correct if I am worng. Thanks for all the help!. Rajat

Correct.

More importantly, this should not represent a departure from your normal reasoning process.
When you first read any sentence, you should ascertain the purpose and meaning of ALL words in that sentence. I.e., if anything describes anything else, you should already be using context to figure out exactly what is describing what else.