GMAT Questions - Soaring television costs accounted for more

[JianchengD868]

Dear Ron,

I have found my error. Soaring is adj not verb-ing, so the phrase "Soaring television costs" is singular.
Plus, soaring television costs belong to election in 1992, not in any previous election, so using it or they to represent cost or costs in any previous election is wrong because we don't know whether cost in other elections is soaring or not.

regards,
JianchengD868

[RonPurewal]

Soaring is adj not verb-ing, so the phrase "Soaring television costs" is singular.

yes.

[RonPurewal]

soaring television costs belong to election in 1992, not in any previous election, so using it or they to represent cost or costs in any previous election is wrong because we don't know whether cost in other elections is soaring or not.

regards,
JianchengD868

actually, for those choices to make sense, "it" would have to be "proportion". (the proportion was greater in '92 than it was in any previous election.)

if "it/they" = "the cost(s)", then it's nonsense to use "was/were". you'd have to have "represented", "accounted for", "amounted to", etc.

[JianchengD868]

soaring television costs belong to election in 1992, not in any previous election, so using it or they to represent cost or costs in any previous election is wrong because we don't know whether cost in other elections is soaring or not.

regards,
JianchengD868

actually, for those choices to make sense, "it" would have to be "proportion". (the proportion was greater in '92 than it was in any previous election.)

if "it/they" = "the cost(s)", then it's nonsense to use "was/were". you'd have to have "represented", "accounted for", "amounted to", etc.

Hi Ron,
Thank you for your help.
Kind regards,
Jiancheng

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[thanghnvn]

Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than it was in any previous election.

A. a greater proportion than it was
B. a greater proportion than
C. a greater proportion than they have been
D. which is greater than was so
E. which is greater than it has been

GMAT Prep Question

D&E are obviously wrong.
I am very confused among A,B and C. What does it refer to in A, and what does they refer to in C? Can we use have been in C? Please help, thanks!

I agree B is best
but the second element of comparison in B is what, pls explain

more importantly, how we can infer the second element of comparison in B ?

pls, help

[RonPurewal]

"in the presidential campaign of 1992" || "in any previous election"

there will always be enough context to determine which things should be parallel, regardless of whether those things are parallel in the original formulation.

[nitoog817]

What does it refer to in A

it doesn't stand for anything at all.

the only singular nouns that precede it are "spending" and "the presidential campaign of 1992". clearly, neither of these is an appropriate antecedent, so this choice is just wrong.

, and what does they refer to in C? Can we use have been in C? Please help, thanks!

"they" would have to refer to "soaring television costs", by elimination: there aren't any other plural nouns.

literally, this makes no sense, since television costs weren't "soaring" in OTHER elections.
(note that you MUST take the pronoun to stand for "soaring television costs"; you are NOT allowed to extract just "television costs" and pretend that the pronoun stands only for that.)

"have been" is an even bigger problem, though, since it implies the presence of "accounting". you can't do this unless the word "accounting" is actually present elsewhere in the sentence; it isn't.

Hi Ron,
Why cant 'It' refer to 'greater proportion', is it because they are too close?

[RonPurewal]

that would give 'a greater proportion than a greater proportion was in any other election'.

this is clearly nonsense, because the whole point of the sentence is that this proportion was LOWER in every prior election!

[RonPurewal]

is it because they are too close?

i don't understand what you are asking here.
'they'?
'close'?
please clarify, thanks.

[eveH982]

in this sentence:

As a result of the continuing decline in the birth rate, fewer people will enter the labor force in the 1980’s than (people did) in the 1960’s and 1970’s, a twenty-year period during which people born after the war swelled the ranks of workers.

can i omit " people did" in the above sentence because of this principle?

"in contexts in which you would repeat a noun, you don't have to include the repeated noun; you may merely imply it. this is known as ellipsis. "

thanks~~~><

[RonPurewal]

huh? if the two words in parentheses are INCLUDED, then that sentence is WRONG.

[RonPurewal]

more generally, remember point #1 at this link: https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p113659

i don't know where people are getting these weird ideas about sentences with "words put back into them", but, NO. that's not a thing.

[aflaamM589]

Hello Ron,
Can position of words be potential problem here if it is changed?
for instance, is following placement also correct?
a proportion greater than in any previous election.

Thanks in advance.

[RonPurewal]

no, but, this exam doesn't test that sort of thing.