Despite recent increases in sales and cash flow....

[jmuduke08]

B) to set dividends more conservatively than they have been

to set is the infinitive verb . there is no auxiliary verb.hence have been cannot be used

this is the right idea, yes.

let me have a go at it, in simpler language:
whenever you use a parallel structure with omitted/elided words, the EXACT omitted word(s) MUST be present, IN PARALLEL STRUCTURE, elsewhere in the sentence. this means in exactly the same form - no alterations, no tense changes, no nothing.

this kills choice (b). that choice ends with "...than they have been", which omits a participle: in other words, it's actually "...than they have been ______", where the ______ is clearly seen to be setting (dividends).
since the EXACT WORD setting doesn't appear anywhere else in this sentence, the sentence is incorrect.

by contrast, choice (c) is a-ok on this point. this choice also contains "...than they have been (__________)", where the parallel concept, "(more) conservative", actually appears elsewhere in the sentence.

When you say "(more) conservative" actually appears elsewhere in the sentence what do you mean? is choice C comparing "to be more conservative __in setting dividends (implied)______" to "they have been in setting dividends"?

[tim]

I believe the short answer is yes. You have obviously answered your first question in identifying where "more conservative" actually shows up, and you seem to have identified the correct match as well. Let us know if you have further questions on this one.

[ghong14]

whenever you use a parallel structure with omitted/elided words, the EXACT omitted word(s) MUST be present, IN PARALLEL STRUCTURE, elsewhere in the sentence. this means in exactly the same form - no alterations, no tense changes, no nothing.

But the eluded word in this problem is cost. So I don't understand what you are saying when you say the exact omitted words must be present. Isn't the whole point of omitted words is that it is omitted. Sorry a little confused by the explanation. Can you elaborate ron? Can you give an example?

[ghong14]

not really -- both of the following are valid:
to set dividends more conservatively
to be more conservative ... in setting dividends
these aren't functionally different.

the real issue with the first two choices lies in their lack of parallelism -- there is nothing properly parallel to "were" in choice (a), or to "have been" in choice (b).
see here for a fuller explanation:
http://www.beatthegmat.com/soar-t62473-15.html#280069

by contrast, the correct answer choice satisfies the parallelism requirements put forth in that post -- note that "to be" and "have been" are both forms of to be

.

If this were the case. Wouldn't there be 2 reasons to eliminate B.

1) because if fails to follow the parrallel structure you mentioned Than/As + Subject + Form of "To Be"

2) The elided word which is setting does not appear any else in the sentence.

Thanks!

[ghong14]

1 * if you have than/as + subject + FORM OF "TO BE" as the second half of a comparison, then you must have another form of "to be" in the first half of the comparison.

2 * if you have than/as + subject + HELPING VERB as the second half of a comparison, then you must have the SAME helping verb (perhaps in a different tense) in the first half of the comparison

.

Can you please give some quick examples of "to be" verbs vs. "helping verbs?" For example is have a helping verb or a to be verb? I thought have is a helping verb if that is the case how can it be in parallel to "to be more conservative" which is a to be verb?

[HanzZ]

Hello experts,

Could you please help identify the parallel structure in the follwoing sentence:

-Historicans have gathered information suggesting that the A encountered B much earlier than previously thought. correct?

-Historicans have gathered information suggesting that the A encountered B much earlier than they had previously thought. correct?

I have seen serveral "than preveiously thought" or "than SOMEONE has previously thought" structure in GMAT questiosn. I just want to know what's parallel to what here? Since I failed to do so, I cannot really identify which elements are necessary.

Thanks a lot! Appreciate your help.

[RonPurewal]

You said you've seen "several" examples of that construction "in GMAT problems".

Could you please cite those problems?
* If they are not from GMAC, please post them in the general verbal folder, with a citation of the source.
* If they are OG problems, write a post in the general folder without the text of the problem, and just cite the OG edition # and problem #.

Thanks.

[WillS10]

Right.

Here are three ways you can use expect as a verb.

Expect immediately before a verb: We expect to receive the new shoes tomorrow.

Expect that before a clause with its own subject: We expect that the new shoes will arrive tomorrow.

Expect before a noun and infinitive: We expect the new shoes to arrive tomorrow.

These all look slightly different when expected is used as a past participle. But that's the subject of a different question.

Just wonder, can "expect" be used in command subjunctive mood (it sounds like a bossy verb to me)?
e.g. I expect that the student be here now.

Thanks.

Will

[RonPurewal]

Just wonder, can "expect" be used in command subjunctive mood (it sounds like a bossy verb to me)?
e.g. I expect that the student be here now.

Thanks.

Will

short answer: no.

long answer:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p112430
(and following posts)

[TranT484]

Dear Ron,
This is my thinking but i did not sure about it:
We have the idiom :expect that and expect s.o to
So we eliminate D and E
In the answer A and B, they are actually compare the action to set dividend in now and in the past. So i expect that they will use : "to set dividends more conservatively than they did". I see this sentence are similar to a question in OG "to verb ..... than ... did". Therefore, i eliminate A and B.

[RonPurewal]

Dear Ron,
This is my thinking but i did not sure about it:
We have the idiom :expect that and expect s.o to
So we eliminate D and E
In the answer A and B, they are actually compare the action to set dividend in now and in the past. So i expect that they will use : "to set dividends more conservatively than they did". I see this sentence are similar to a question in OG "to verb ..... than ... did". Therefore, i eliminate A and B.

mostly correct.

only one thing isn't quite right here:
"expect that" isn't an idiom. it's just one particular case of "expect + NOUN" (e.g., one can expect improvement).
more on that here:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... tml#p47979

[mikalaisin]

Hi Ron,
can you please help me with choice B. Even though i read all the thread i still can't understand why it's incorrect.
I've eliminated D,E - because of "that they will" - they ambiguous
A - were - wrong tense. Should be Perfect Tense

I left with with 2 choices B and C.

B) to set dividends more conservatively than they have been- it's not parallel, based on previous posts.

to set dividends more conservatively than they have been in setting dividents - to set and in setting is not parallel - is my understanding is correct?

C) to be more conservative than they have been in setting dividends -

to be more conservative (in setting dividents) than they have been in setting dividends

Can you please tell me whether my reasoning is correct.

[RonPurewal]

too much thinking.

in B, there is NOTHING parallel to 'they have been'.
in other words, 'have been' is completely meaningless in choice B—literally, it has no meaning whatsoever—because there's no referent for it.

in C, on the other hand, you have 'to be' || 'have been'. so C forms an explicit comparison between two levels of conservatism.

B: not parallel
C: parallel
thinking past this point is over-thinking. don't do it.

[aflaamM589]

Ron, thanks for a great explanation.

Would this be correct also if the below was given?
"to set dividends more conservatively than they DID"

i think that would be ok, but i'd still look for official validation before giving you the 100% thumbs-up.

Hello Ron,
Isn't it incorrect because did can stand for a verb whereas to set is not a verb?

[RonPurewal]

no.

for instance,
I want to finish the race before you do
is DEFINITELY a correct sentence.