Between 1990 and 2000 the global economy

[RonPurewal]

I'm confused on the 'if the noun has a timeframe attached to it, then any pronoun will carry that same timeframe'

er, according to above, why don't we consider 'between 1990 and 2000' a timeframe attached to 'the global economy' in choice A?

"between 1990 and 2000" describes the entire sentence that follows.

if you want this type of modifier to describe a noun, you have to put it after the noun.

[RonPurewal]

another example:

In Country X sheep are considered sacred animals.
"in country x" describes the whole idea that sheep are considered sacred.
so, in country x, people believe that sheep anywhere are sacred.

vs.

Sheep in country X are considered sacred animals.
now, "in country X" describes only "sheep".
according to this sentence, only those sheep that are physically located within the borders of country X are considered sacred.

[AllenY389]

I'm confused on the 'if the noun has a timeframe attached to it, then any pronoun will carry that same timeframe'

er, according to above, why don't we consider 'between 1990 and 2000' a timeframe attached to 'the global economy' in choice A?

"between 1990 and 2000" describes the entire sentence that follows.

if you want this type of modifier to describe a noun, you have to put it after the noun.

Thanks
Paris,Texas

[RonPurewal]

sure.

[AllenY389]

Hi, Ron, another thing needs your help!

In a similar question but the choice B is a little different
" B) Since 1990 the growth of the global economy has been more than that during 10,000 years, from when agriculture began. "

you said that " the growth of the global economy" can't use "more"

and I remember in your online stuy hall, on Oct 21st, 2010, you said that
don't use units+physical description.
such as "the speed...is faster" "the weight..is heavier"--wrong
is "the growth of the global economy" an units？ if it can't use " more" and corresponding physical description, which word can it use?
or in general, could you explain the meaning of "units" and "description"
I'm not a native speaker, I can't understand it very well.
could you explain it more?
thanks in advance!

[RonPurewal]

that observation pertains to the names of mathematical quantities.

e.g.,
the mathematical quantity for how tall something is = "height"
so, it's wrong (redundant) to say that a height is "taller" than another height.

actually, you can conceptualize the error in either of two ways:
1/ redundancy;
2/ nonsense.
#2: if you read the sentence very literally, it doesn't make any sense, because you can't stand two heights next to each other and see which one is taller.
you can, on the other hand, state that one person is taller than another person—because you can stand two people next to each other and see who is taller.

[RonPurewal]

same thing:
* a rate can't be "faster" than another rate. however, a process can be faster than another process.

"growth" is a process, not a mathematical quantity.
a growth rate is a quantity.
so...
• it's perfectly sensible to write that the growth of one thing has been "faster" than the growth of another thing.
• on the other hand, it's wrong to write that a growth rate is "faster" than another growth rate.

[Navneet]

Hi Ron
Between A & B
Option A says- during the 10,000 years from the beginning of agriculture to 1950.
Here option clearly giving actual duration - essential to meaning of sentence

and Option B Says - during 10,000 years, from when agriculture began to 1950
Here in this option actual duration is in modifier - seems unessential and inconsistent with original meaning.

On the basis of above logic could we eliminate option B ?

[750plus]

Between 1990 and 2000 the global economy grew more than it did during the 10,000 years from the beginning of agriculture to 1950.
(A) Between 1990 and 2000 the global economy grew more than it did during the 10,000 years from the beginning of agriculture --OA
(B) Between 1990 and 2000 the growth of the global economy was more than that during 10,000 years, from when agriculture began
(C) The growth of the global economy between 1990 and 2000 exceeds that which had been for 10,000 years from the beginning of agriculture
(D) The growth of the global economy between 1990 and 2000 exceeds what it has been for 10,000 years, from when agriculture began
(E) The growth of the global economy between 1990 and 2000 exceeded what it did for the 10,000 years from the beginning of agriculture
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Team,

Can you explain if the usage of Past Perfect in option C is incorrect ? Also, it'd be great if you can shed some light on 'exceeds' .

Shouldn't exceeds be exceeded in option C .

Warm Regards
Rajat Gugnani

[tim]

Past perfect is wrong. "exceeds" is wrong. Both are, independently, valid reasons for rejecting C.

[750plus]

Past perfect is wrong. "exceeds" is wrong. Both are, independently, valid reasons for rejecting C.

Thanks for the confirmation.

So what should come in place of exceeds ?

[RonPurewal]

if you had to put a form of 'exceed' there, then you'd put 'exceeded'. (if there's a past 'time stamp' on an event, then, generally, it takes the past tense.)

on the other hand, you shouldn't want ANY form of 'exceed'.

consider:
The growth of X exceeded the growth of Y.
X grew more than Y.
in terms of wordiness / efficiency of expression, the second of these is very clearly superior to the first. when you see HUGE DIFFERENCES in efficiency / economy of expression / 'wordiness', you can use those differences as a basis for elimination.

[edited——in the original post, i inadvertently switched 'first' and 'second']

[RonPurewal]

^^ notice the two words i wrote in capitals up there—HUGE and DIFFERENCE.
both of these words are very important.

'DIFFERENCE':
you should NEVER try to judge whether an individual answer choice is 'wordy'.
this should be a RELATIVE JUDGMENT ('beauty contest') ONLY.

'HUGE':
the difference should be large.
e.g.,
The growth of X exceeded that of Y vs. X grew more than Y is a big difference.
in grass and in trees vs. in grass and trees is NOT a big difference.

[750plus]

if you had to put a form of 'exceed' there, then you'd put 'exceeded'. (if there's a past 'time stamp' on an event, then, generally, it takes the past tense.)

on the other hand, you shouldn't want ANY form of 'exceed'.

consider:
The growth of X exceeded the growth of Y.
X grew more than Y.
in terms of wordiness / efficiency of expression, the first of these is very clearly superior to the second. when you see HUGE DIFFERENCES in efficiency / economy of expression / 'wordiness', you can use those differences as a basis for elimination.

I think you meant to say that the second of these is very clearly superior to the first.

X grew more than Y - This is preferable.

I hope I am not wrong.

Regards

[RonPurewal]

haha... yes, that's what i meant.

yay for dyslexia! and thanks for catching that.
i'll go edit the original.