For the last five years the Dutch economy has grown faster

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron, why it is "the economies of Britain, France, and Germany" not "the economy of Britain, France, or Germany"? Thanks!

three countries; three economies.

[SudhanshuK453]

Hey Ron! Great explanations. One final question: is the expression "than have those of Britain, Germany, and France" correct?

I mean can there be a 'have' btw than and those because I thought than and those should always be adjacent.

[RonPurewal]

Hey Ron! Great explanations. One final question: is the expression "than have those of Britain, Germany, and France" correct?

the placement of "have" is perfectly fine.

that construction is still incorrect, though, because there is no noun for which "those" can stand. (you'd need "economies", but the sentence contains the singular form "economy".)

[RonPurewal]

in fact, sometimes it's imperative to place the helping verb in that location.

e.g.,
I know more about Shakespeare than my brother does.
I know more about Shakespeare than does my brother.
(both correct; most writers would write the first one)

but...
I know more about Shakespeare than my brother, who has never taken a class on British literature, does.
(while not strictly incorrect, this sentence is awful -- it's almost impossible to understand in one reading. a good writer would not write it.)
I know more about Shakespeare than does my brother, who has never taken a class on British literature.
(this sentence is well written and easy to understand.)

you can see the point: if there's a bunch of junk after the noun, the helping verb usually must come before the noun in order to maintain clarity.

[RonPurewal]

incidentally, you will never have to choose between the above placements, since that decision is a style issue ("bad/unreadable sentence" vs. "good sentence" -- NOT "right" vs. "wrong").

on the other hand, you most certainly must understand that both placements exist, and you must not eliminate either one!

[SudhanshuK453]

Thanks a ton Ron! You are the best!

Really appreciate the succinct, yet perfect reply

[SudhanshuK453]

One follow up question: Is it ok to replace the 'or' with 'and' in the correct answer? Because I thought or means that the Dutch economy just needs to be better than one of the 3 economies but 'and' means that the dutch economy needs to better than all the 3 economies.

This is purely based on my understanding of how GMAT treats lists containing an 'or' , 'and'.

[RonPurewal]

if you replace "and" with "or", you also have to change "economies" to "economy".

if this doesn't make immediate sense, here's an example that will probably resonate more with normal common sense:
i bought tickets to the basketball game and the hockey game (= at least two tickets)
i'll give you a ticket to the basketball game or the hockey game (= only one ticket)

[harika.apu]

Hi Ron. I eliminated E simply because I think those 2 things are not independent. So " And" is not proper there. Since the low unemployment rate is an result of the growing economy.
This is what I learned from one of your lecture teaching about " and ".
But it didn't work here..
So I am confused.
Under what situation I can use " and" to eliminate choices?
Does the rule only apply to very strong cause and effect relationship?

Thanks!

Be careful! This is okay. Note that we don't simply have an "and" connecting these two independent clauses, we have a "comma +and". A "comma + and" connects two independent clauses. See more here: http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/com ... 11444.html

Hello jamie,
I have a doubt regarding comma+and construction.
If the unemployment has remainded ... in option E is independent
Then how is it referring to Dutch
Is it not that unemployment in Dutch remained constant ?

Thanks:)

[tim]

If the unemployment has remainded ... in option E is independent
Then how is it referring to Dutch

I do not understand what you are saying here at all. If it is relevant, please retype your question in a grammatically correct form so we can help you. As for unemployment remaining constant, that is not suggested anywhere in the sentence. The unemployment rate can fluctuate while still remaining below that of the other three countries, if that is what you're concerned about.

[RonPurewal]

Hello jamie,
I have a doubt regarding comma+and construction.
If the unemployment has remainded ... in option E is independent
Then how is it referring to Dutch
Is it not that unemployment in Dutch remained constant ?

Thanks:)

i think i see what's happening here. you're not confused at all by the sentence. rather, you're confused by the terminology that was (unnecessarily) introduced into the discussion.

the earlier post(s) discussed 'independent clauses'. i have absolutely no idea what this term means—and absolutely no reason to care. (i've managed 20+ years as a professional writer and editor without ever needing such labels.)
...so you shouldn't care, either.

your understanding of the sentence seems to be perfectly valid.

NEVER introduce unnecessary terminology. (very, very little terminology is actually necessary, so, in practice, this pretty much means 'don't use any grammar terms except basic parts of speech'.)
there's no possible benefit, and—as you can see here—there's a very real possibility of confusion.

[vili1108]

In choice D, can we justify the usage of "with" here? From what I learned that "with" cannot starts off an independent sentence and "with....." modifier must be close to the noun that it's modifying?

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

the 'with...' part is not really a problem.

read here:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p102567

if we view the steady low unemployment as a component/aspect of the dutch economy's growth—an interpretation that is certainly not unreasonable—this usage is fine.
(the correct answer presents the growth and the low unemployment as two separate observations—a different interpretation that's also fine.)

[RonPurewal]

and "with....." modifier must be close to the noun that it's modifying?

Thanks

also, this question ^^ is misguided. if you have complete sentence + comma + 'with ___', then the modifier should NOT describe only a noun. it should describe the whole idea of the complete sentence that precedes it.

[harika.apu]

Hello jamie,
I have a doubt regarding comma+and construction.
If the unemployment has remainded ... in option E is independent
Then how is it referring to Dutch
Is it not that unemployment in Dutch remained constant ?

Thanks:)

i think i see what's happening here. you're not confused at all by the sentence. rather, you're confused by the terminology that was (unnecessarily) introduced into the discussion.

the earlier post(s) discussed 'independent clauses'. i have absolutely no idea what this term means—and absolutely no reason to care. (i've managed 20+ years as a professional writer and editor without ever needing such labels.)
...so you shouldn't care, either.

your understanding of the sentence seems to be perfectly valid.

NEVER introduce unnecessary terminology. (very, very little terminology is actually necessary, so, in practice, this pretty much means 'don't use any grammar terms except basic parts of speech'.)
there's no possible benefit, and—as you can see here—there's a very real possibility of confusion.

Yes Ron , I understand . Thanks