number of foreign-born residents and their children

[RonPurewal]

Ron, is there any possibility that "compare with/to" can be followed by a sentence?

no.

"to" and "with" are prepositions, so, like any other prepositions, they must be followed by nouns.

[manikrana.87]

Hi Ron,
Thanks for the Nice explanation. But my only concern was for the referent of "it" which I think(seems you too agree) refers to the "the group",but produce an illogical sentence(as you explained).
Why I asked this question was because you mentioned that "it" has no referent.So wanted to clear this thought.

And also will the comparison(only comparison part) be proper if in "(B)population as compared to 2000, when it was 20 percent" we replace "to 2000" with "in 2000"?

no.
"compare(d) to" and "compare(d) with" are legitimate idioms; "compare(d) in" is unidiomatic.

What about "compared to IN 2000"? Is this construction absurd or legitimate?

I know that "compare(d) to" and "compare(d) with" should be followed by a noun,but still the above question :)

Hi,

I want to chip in that even if the referent of 'it' is clear ("this group" in this case), we can still eliminate (B) simply because we are comparing the subject with 2000, which is not a logical comparison. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

I want to chip in that even if the referent of 'it' is clear ("this group" in this case), we can still eliminate (B) simply because we are comparing the subject with 2000, which is not a logical comparison. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks!

that's correct.

[amit1234]

Hi,
In option E, 'compared' also refer to the subject of previous clause that is 'the group'. How come this makes sense.

This group compared with 20 percent in 2010

two things.

(1)
i really, really doubt that the gmat will EVER require the distinction between "compare to" and "compare with" to eliminate a wrong answer.
there's just not ANY sort of substantial agreement among authorities on this particular issue. in fact, if you poke around common authoritative sources, many of them actually contradict each other.
for instance, the rule that has been propounded by ctrajaram (below) is out there. but there's also a contradictory rule that says that "compare to" is for similarities OR differences, and that "compare with" is only used when you're talking about BOTH similarities and differences.

in any case, so far there have been NO official problems actually RELYING on this difference. so:
do not use "compare to" vs. "compare with" to eliminate answer choices. instead, find some other criterion on which to make the decision.

(2)
there should be a SEMICOLON between "not" and "in 1910". if there's a comma there (as you've indicated), then this is a run-on sentence.

i will assume that this comma is supposed to be a semicolon in the following.

A. population when compared to 20 percent in 2000

the "when" here kills this answer choice.

remember that you have to read very literally.
if you read the "when" literally, then you'd be saying that the 1910 immigrant group made up 35% of the population WHEN THEY WERE COMPARED to 20 percent (of something we haven't even specified) in 2000. of course, this makes no literal sense whatsoever.

B. population as compared to 2000, when it was 20 percent

nothing to which the pronoun "it" can refer.

C. population, comparing it with 20 percent in 2000

this is a COMMA + -ING modifier.
these modifiers modify the ENTIRE PRECEDING CLAUSE, and the verbal (in this case "comparing") is attributed to the subject of the preceding clause.
therefore, according to this answer choice, "this group" actually compared "it" (we're not sure what "it" is) with 20 percent - and did so in 2000 (even though they were in 1910).

D. population, unlike 2000, with 20 percent

"unlike 2000" suggests that there is a direct comparison between "this group" (the subject of the preceding sentence) and the year 2000. that's a nonparallel comparison.
also, the preposition "with" isn't parallel to anything.

E. population, compared with 20 percent in 2000

valid comparison between two percentages.

note the parallel constructions "in 1910" and "in 2000", and also note the lack of the fatal alterations of meaning that exist in (a) and (c).

[jlucero]

Hi,
In option E, 'compared' also refer to the subject of previous clause that is 'the group'. How come this makes sense.

This group compared with 20 percent in 2010

Because it compares the group in 2010. Notice the "in 2010" refers to the group and not the percent:

This group in 1910 compared with this group in 2010.

[vijay19839]

Ron,

In one of your classes on 'Thursdays with Ron', You gave one example:-
As a child Frank Invented his own Secret code, based on Rebus like puzzles.


(Here 'based on Rebus like puzzles' modifies 'Secret Code')

As mentioned in the class, We can apply these rules for any past participle modifiers also.

Can u explain how in Option E, 'Compared with 20 Percent in 2000' modifies the subject of the preceding clause? It should be modifying the preceding Noun which is 'Population'

Thanks
Vijay

[RonPurewal]

Ron,

In one of your classes on 'Thursdays with Ron', You gave one example:-
As a child Frank Invented his own Secret code, based on Rebus like puzzles.


(Here 'based on Rebus like puzzles' modifies 'Secret Code')

As mentioned in the class, We can apply these rules for any past participle modifiers also.

Can u explain how in Option E, 'Compared with 20 Percent in 2000' modifies the subject of the preceding clause? It should be modifying the preceding Noun which is 'Population'

Thanks
Vijay

it modifies "35 percent of the population", which comes right before the comma -- just as in the other examples you've given here.

[vijay19839]

Ron

Thanks for the clarification as few of the posts from 'GetmyDream' and 'Joe' were confusing that 'Compared to' refers back to the Subject of the preceding clause.

Now it is very clear but in retrospection, It seems very stupid that I couldn't figure out two quantities that are being 'Compared to'.

Thanks for everything!!

Thanks
Vijay

Ron,

In one of your classes on 'Thursdays with Ron', You gave one example:-
As a child Frank Invented his own Secret code, based on Rebus like puzzles.


(Here 'based on Rebus like puzzles' modifies 'Secret Code')

As mentioned in the class, We can apply these rules for any past participle modifiers also.

Can u explain how in Option E, 'Compared with 20 Percent in 2000' modifies the subject of the preceding clause? It should be modifying the preceding Noun which is 'Population'

Thanks
Vijay

it modifies "35 percent of the population", which comes right before the comma -- just as in the other examples you've given here.

[tim]

:)

[270699172]

Ron,
in the correct answer, which noun is "compared with 20 percent in 2000" modified?

[tim]

We are comparing the two percentages. Ron mentioned this in 2009.

[JbhB682]

Hi Experts - in option B,

What is being compared to "2000" - is it "1910" or "Group" ?

I thought it was "1910" being compared to "2000"

Thus, I thought option B was okay in terms of comparison (option B was comparing Year to another Year)

Is that thinking right ?

[JbhB682]

In option B - what is the structure ? Is it

- An idiom [X as compared to Y]

I don't think i have seen such an idiom before. I checked the idioms list online and I dont see this idiom there.


OR

- is "as" playing perhaps a prepositional phrase [as + noun] ?

[esledge]

Hi Experts - in option B,

What is being compared to "2000" - is it "1910" or "Group" ?

I thought it was "1910" being compared to "2000"

Thus, I thought option B was okay in terms of comparison (option B was comparing Year to another Year)

Is that thinking right ?

No, that’s wrong. In (B), I think 2000 is compared to “population” or maybe “35 percent,” since "of the population" modifies that noun. The comparison marker is “as compared to,” so you’d look closer to those words. For the years to be compared, you’d need them to be closer, and you’d need both years to apply to the clause…or you’d need to give “in 2000” a whole clause of its own to parallel the clause that 1910 has (“this group made up 35 percent”).

In option B - what is the structure ? Is it

- An idiom [X as compared to Y]

I don't think i have seen such an idiom before. I checked the idioms list online and I dont see this idiom there.


OR

- is "as" playing perhaps a prepositional phrase [as + noun] ?

I think that’s the other problem: this is not a preferred idiom. I tried to think of a correct example using “as compared to” and came up short—the “as” is a preposition that adds (possibly unwanted) meaning. "X as compared to Y" is not in our idiom list, so that alone would be enough reason to eliminate (B).