GMAT Question:- A recent review of pay scales indicates

[kristy11126]

choice b is badly worded: when speaking about ratios as is done here, you cannot leave 'times' hanging like this. sometimes you can use pronouns - the height of the sears tower is more than four times that of the statue of liberty - but you can't use empty space.

Hi Ron,

choice b already has the words '419 times the pay of...'. Since gmat doesn't tolerate redundancy, I think it should be correct to use '42 times (the pay of) in 1980.'

Please Note another example from prep:
in-california-today-t5783.html?hilit=in%20california%20today

The correct choice c, 'Today, more than 43% of Californians under the age of eighteen are Hispanic, compared with about 35% decade ago.', employs the use of '35%', which omits (of Californians).

NOTE:
if something appears on the correct answer to an official problem, then
* it's correct
* its usage makes sense

Please help. Any difference between the usage of 'X times' and 'Y percentage'? Thanks!

I think the biggest problem with choice b is 'compares'.

[RonPurewal]

Please help. Any difference between the usage of 'X times' and 'Y percentage'? Thanks!

i don't really have anything beyond what i already wrote in the post from which you quoted.

specifically:
you can't just write "42 times" by itself. it has to be 42 times something.
if it's 42 times something that was mentioned previously, or 42 times something that is in parallel structure to something that was mentioned previously, then you could use a relative pronoun (i.e., something like "42 times that in 1990", etc).

but you can't just leave "42 times" hanging out alone.

percentages, on the other hand, can be referenced by themselves (as long as context, somewhere else, clearly indicates what the percent is of).
for instance, you can say "80% of the X's are male, up from 67% five years ago". here, the second percentage is understood to be also "of the X's".

[cesar.rodriguez.blanco]

choice b is badly worded: 'compares to 42 times in 1980' seems to say that, on forty-two different occasions in 1980, the ceo:blue-collar ratio reached 419:1. this is not what we are trying to say.
.

Is B wrong only because of the meaning?

[RonPurewal]

choice b is badly worded: 'compares to 42 times in 1980' seems to say that, on forty-two different occasions in 1980, the ceo:blue-collar ratio reached 419:1. this is not what we are trying to say.
.

Is B wrong only because of the meaning?

well, i'm 99% sure that
"that compares to..."
is wrong.

i say this is unidiomatic; you want "(as) compared to/with".

--

it IS possible to use "compares" as a standalone verb, but i'm pretty sure you can't do so unless you attach an adjective, such as "favorably", to it:
this performance compares favorably to last week's. --> i.e., it's better

[NIKESH_PAHUJA]

Ron

Had C read as written below, would it have been correct ? ( removed 'their pay' from
as compared to 42 times their pay )

that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times , the ratio


or still you feel , comparison is not complete ? and 'times' is hanging?

[jahnavi_p]

Although I understood the explanations to all the other options, while reading this post, I got confused about one thing - option A

A. that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times

Here, isn't pay compared to blue collar workers? Shouldn't the right phrase be ' an average of 419 time more pay than that of blue collar workers'? (where 'that' indicates 'pay').

As per example that Ron earns 10 times more than Bush. Shouldn't it be Ron earns 10 times more than Bush does? Ron/Stacey, please clear my doubts on this aspect.
Thanks

[RonPurewal]

Ron

Had C read as written below, would it have been correct ? ( removed 'their pay' from
as compared to 42 times their pay )

that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times , the ratio


or still you feel , comparison is not complete ? and 'times' is hanging?

i'm pretty sure that "42 times" has to be followed up by something, so that this would be incomplete.

of course, this judgment is not 100% certain; i'd have to see evidence in an official problem before making any definitive declarations either way.

[RonPurewal]

As per example that Ron earns 10 times more than Bush. Shouldn't it be Ron earns 10 times more than Bush does? Ron/Stacey, please clear my doubts on this aspect.
Thanks

remember that comparisons, like other parallel structures, are flexible in terms of the words coming before the parallel markers. it's only the words that come after the parallel markers - i.e., the words on the RIGHT side of the parallel construction - that are "locked in" for sure.
you don't have to count all the words on the left!

when you look at a parallel structure, look at the element on the RIGHT first.
then, look on the LEFT, and see whether anything logically matches it.
this goes not only for comparisons, but also for other parallel constructions.

for instance, ALL of the following are correct:
tom runs more often than dave.
tom runs more often than dave does.
tom runs more often than dave walks.

in the first one, the right-hand parallel element is "dave". the left-hand parallel element is "tom". this is properly parallel.

in the second one, the right-hand parallel element is "dave does". the left-hand parallel element is "tom runs". this is properly parallel.

in the third one, the right-hand parallel element is "dave walks". the left-hand parallel element is "tom runs". this is properly parallel.

--

so, in your examples:
ron earns ten times more than bush
ron earns ten times more than bush does
ron earns ten times more than bush earns
all correct.

--

the only time when you MUST use an auxiliary verb (such as "does") is when the sentence is ambiguous if you don't.

for instance:
i know more about shakespeare than my brother
--> ambiguous, since this could mean one of the following 2 things:
(1) my knowledge of shakespeare is better than my brother's;
(2) i know more information about shakespeare than about my own brother.

in this case, we'd have to say "...than my brother does" (or "than does my brother"), if we been #1. if we mean #2, we'd have to say "...than about my brother".

[pakuya.kao]

Dear Ron,

for Answer C.
is the comparation grammatically correct?

for example,
like A, B+verb
we compare A with B.

for answer C,
As compared to 42 times thier pay, CEO's now earn

the sentence seems that 42 times thier pay are compared with CEO.

do i overlook or misunderstand anything?
please help!

thanks and best regards!
Tim

[tim]

C is grammatically correct, but the example you bring up doesn't appear relevant to this question..

42 times is being compared to 419 times, not to the CEOs. Your confusion appears to stem from the fact that you copied the answer choice incorrectly..

[phuonglink]

hi Ron,
Is B wrong because it used "compares" rather than "compared" ("compares" should be used in passive) and using "the ratio that compares ..." is more wordy than "..,as compared" in (c)?

[tim]

Active versus passive voice is not an issue here, because while "compares" is always active voice, choice B changes the wording to allow for this. B is wrong for other reasons..

And please keep in mind that "wordy" and "awkward" are almost always bad reasons to eliminate wrong answers. You need to be looking for grammatical reasons instead..

[phuonglink]

Active versus passive voice is not an issue here, because while "compares" is always active voice, choice B changes the wording to allow for this. B is wrong for other reasons..

And please keep in mind that "wordy" and "awkward" are almost always bad reasons to eliminate wrong answers. You need to be looking for grammatical reasons instead..

Thank you Tim, what you have corrected me are the medicine to my failed concepts. I've come with the idea to eliminate B:
(B): "CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio ..." --> "419 times the pay" cannot make a ratio alone.
while in (C): "CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio ..." --> "419 times the pay" v.s "42 times their pay" can form a rate.
Is my thinking right? Please kindly correct me.

[jnelson0612]

choice b is badly worded: 'compares to 42 times in 1980' seems to say that, on forty-two different occasions in 1980, the ceo:blue-collar ratio reached 419:1. this is not what we are trying to say.

more generally, when speaking about ratios as is done here, you cannot leave 'times' hanging like this. sometimes you can use pronouns - the height of the sears tower is more than four times that of the statue of liberty - but you can't use empty space.

choice c exhibits proper usage of 'times' followed by their pay. it also uses the ratio, a correct identification of exactly what is being described.

phuong, take a look at Ron's explanation of answer choice B. I think you are on the right track but this will help you be more precise with your reasoning.

[phuonglink]

choice b is badly worded: 'compares to 42 times in 1980' seems to say that, on forty-two different occasions in 1980, the ceo:blue-collar ratio reached 419:1. this is not what we are trying to say.

more generally, when speaking about ratios as is done here, you cannot leave 'times' hanging like this. sometimes you can use pronouns - the height of the sears tower is more than four times that of the statue of liberty - but you can't use empty space.

choice c exhibits proper usage of 'times' followed by their pay. it also uses the ratio, a correct identification of exactly what is being described.

phuong, take a look at Ron's explanation of answer choice B. I think you are on the right track but this will help you be more precise with your reasoning.

Thank you for your guidance Nelson. How lucky i am when i found this forum to learn all the invaluable explantions. I come from a very far country (not many people have ever heard of its name i guess) where gmat coures are not provided in my place. Therefore i'm sorry you for sometimes i dug some sc too far to be necessary thought that i could find as much errors as possible to eliminate incorrect options of other sc in real test. Once again, thank you for your guidance.