Ron's advice is that "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. "
My question then is regarding these followings sentences:
People in China are taller than Spain.
(People in China are taller than [people in] Spain.)
Gas prices in 2007 are higher than in 1997
(Gas prices in 2007 are higher than [gas prices] in 1997)
Consumption accounted for more than half the GDP in the 90's, a greater proportion than in any other decade.
(greater proportion than [the proportion] in any other decade.)
My gut tells me that the first sentence is wrong as it illogically compares people in China and Spain itself. I intuit however that the second and third sentences are correct. What then are the differences among these three sentences? All of them fall under Ron's advice mentioned above.
GMAT Forum
- FI143
- Forum Guests
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 1:59 pm
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
Hi,
Do you have a link to that?
I'd bet that is something I wrote at least 4-5 years ago. At that point, these statements corresponded closely with GMAC's output of comparison sentences.
Lately they've come out with several that don't have such close parallelism. (This could very well have been a response to the very discussion you're citing. It's happened before; for instance, within a year after "don't use being" appeared on a number of forums, GMAC had produced several new problems whose correct answers contained "being".)
If you'd be so kind as to provide a link to the original quote, I'll edit it. Thanks.
Do you have a link to that?
I'd bet that is something I wrote at least 4-5 years ago. At that point, these statements corresponded closely with GMAC's output of comparison sentences.
Lately they've come out with several that don't have such close parallelism. (This could very well have been a response to the very discussion you're citing. It's happened before; for instance, within a year after "don't use being" appeared on a number of forums, GMAC had produced several new problems whose correct answers contained "being".)
If you'd be so kind as to provide a link to the original quote, I'll edit it. Thanks.
- FI143
- Forum Guests
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 1:59 pm
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
RonPurewal Wrote:Hi,
Do you have a link to that?
I'd bet that is something I wrote at least 4-5 years ago. At that point, these statements corresponded closely with GMAC's output of comparison sentences.
Lately they've come out with several that don't have such close parallelism. (This could very well have been a response to the very discussion you're citing. It's happened before; for instance, within a year after "don't use being" appeared on a number of forums, GMAC had produced several new problems whose correct answers contained "being".)
If you'd be so kind as to provide a link to the original quote, I'll edit it. Thanks.
Ron, whenever I try to copy the link, the site says, "This message was flagged as spam and has been denied." The title of the thread though is, "Despite recent increases in sales and cash flow...."
How do we tackle such comparisons though?
For example, "People in China are taller than Spain." Do we refrain from immediately discarding this answer choice on the basis of illogical comparison? ..and instead look for other inferior answer choices?
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
your first two examples say "x IS/ARE ___er than y".
in sentences with this structure, there is absolutely no ambiguity at all about the comparison: it's between "x" and "y".
accordingly, i've colored the parts that MUST be compared in your first 2 examples:
nonsense. (how tall is spain?)
also nonsense.
in sentences with this structure, there is absolutely no ambiguity at all about the comparison: it's between "x" and "y".
accordingly, i've colored the parts that MUST be compared in your first 2 examples:
FI143 Wrote:People in China are taller than Spain.
nonsense. (how tall is spain?)
Gas prices in 2007 are higher than in 1997
also nonsense.
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
for sentences that don't have such a simple structure, the goal is to avoid introducing unnecessary complexity.
here's what you should do with such sentences:
1/ identify the right-hand element (= the one that follows the comparison signal)
2/ ask yourself whether this element SHOULD be part of the comparison, according to context/common sense. (there are no "omissions" here. if the stuff following the signal isn't actually compared to something else, the sentence is wrong.)
3/ if so, try to find something that matches it on the other side. if you find such a thing, you're good.
some examples related to your first 2 sentences:
People are taller in China than Spain.
1/
the right-hand element is "spain".
2/
the sentence is not intended to compare spain itself with anything. so, this version is wrong. quit.
--
People are taller in China than in Spain.
1/
the right-hand element is "in spain".
2/
the sentence compares heights of people, sure. however, it's also true that the sentence directly compares the situation in china with the situation in spain. (it does not, on the other hand, compare the actual countries of china and spain; hence why the foregoing example is wrong.)
so, this works.
3/
"in china" is there.
this one works.
here's what you should do with such sentences:
1/ identify the right-hand element (= the one that follows the comparison signal)
2/ ask yourself whether this element SHOULD be part of the comparison, according to context/common sense. (there are no "omissions" here. if the stuff following the signal isn't actually compared to something else, the sentence is wrong.)
3/ if so, try to find something that matches it on the other side. if you find such a thing, you're good.
some examples related to your first 2 sentences:
People are taller in China than Spain.
1/
the right-hand element is "spain".
2/
the sentence is not intended to compare spain itself with anything. so, this version is wrong. quit.
--
People are taller in China than in Spain.
1/
the right-hand element is "in spain".
2/
the sentence compares heights of people, sure. however, it's also true that the sentence directly compares the situation in china with the situation in spain. (it does not, on the other hand, compare the actual countries of china and spain; hence why the foregoing example is wrong.)
so, this works.
3/
"in china" is there.
this one works.
Last edited by RonPurewal on Thu May 10, 2018 8:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
--
gas prices were higher in 2007 than in 1997.
1/
right-hand element = "in 1997"
2/
this is legitimate (see write-up of previous example, which works in exactly the same way)
3/
"in 2007" is there; we're good.
--
gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997.
1/
right-hand element = "[gas prices] in 1997"
(meaning of the pronoun is obvious, i hope)
2/
we want to compare prices, so the set-up is ok
3/
nothing works on the other side. we need "gas prices in 2007" (in one piece), but only "gas prices" is there.
nope.
--
gas prices in 2007 were higher than those in 1997.
this is one of the easy ones: "X were higher than Y".
X = gas prices in 2007
Y = [gas prices] in 1997
(:
workable.
gas prices were higher in 2007 than in 1997.
1/
right-hand element = "in 1997"
2/
this is legitimate (see write-up of previous example, which works in exactly the same way)
3/
"in 2007" is there; we're good.
--
gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997.
1/
right-hand element = "[gas prices] in 1997"
(meaning of the pronoun is obvious, i hope)
2/
we want to compare prices, so the set-up is ok
3/
nothing works on the other side. we need "gas prices in 2007" (in one piece), but only "gas prices" is there.
nope.
--
gas prices in 2007 were higher than those in 1997.
this is one of the easy ones: "X were higher than Y".
X = gas prices in 2007
Y = [gas prices] in 1997
(:
workable.
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
most importantly—
for this exam, learning to WRITE comparison sentences is a complete waste of your time.
don't forget that the problems are multiple-choice!
rather than learning to write these sentences from scratch, you can just compare the answer choices, "beauty contest" style.
needless to say, this is a hundred million zillion thousand times easier.
• to write these sentences correctly on a consistent basis, you need the equivalent of a professional writer's/editor's skill set.
• to judge "beauty contests" among answer choices, on the other hand, all you need is the simple ability to say "this looks more like X than that does".
it's bad to waste time and effort in the first place--but even worse when you're wasting it on a technique that is way, way harder AND doesn't work as well as what you should be doing.
for this exam, learning to WRITE comparison sentences is a complete waste of your time.
don't forget that the problems are multiple-choice!
rather than learning to write these sentences from scratch, you can just compare the answer choices, "beauty contest" style.
needless to say, this is a hundred million zillion thousand times easier.
• to write these sentences correctly on a consistent basis, you need the equivalent of a professional writer's/editor's skill set.
• to judge "beauty contests" among answer choices, on the other hand, all you need is the simple ability to say "this looks more like X than that does".
it's bad to waste time and effort in the first place--but even worse when you're wasting it on a technique that is way, way harder AND doesn't work as well as what you should be doing.
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
the problem in this link is a very good indication of whether you're thinking about these things properly:
can-somebody-help-me-out-with-this-question-t4278.html
• if you're trying to evaluate the choices individually, that problem is VERY hard.
• if you view it as a "beauty contest", it's actually quite easy. there's one answer choice that exactly resembles its non-underlined counterpart, and there are four answer choices that look nothing like it at all.
can-somebody-help-me-out-with-this-question-t4278.html
• if you're trying to evaluate the choices individually, that problem is VERY hard.
• if you view it as a "beauty contest", it's actually quite easy. there's one answer choice that exactly resembles its non-underlined counterpart, and there are four answer choices that look nothing like it at all.
- JazyC81
- Forum Guests
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 10:59 pm
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
for sentences that don't have such a simple structure, the goal is to avoid introducing unnecessary complexity.
here's what you should do with such sentences:
1/ identify the right-hand element (= the one that follows the comparison signal)
2/ ask yourself whether this element SHOULD be part of the comparison, according to context/common sense. (there are no "omissions" here. if the stuff following the signal isn't actually compared to something else, the sentence is wrong.)
3/ if so, try to find something that matches it on the other side. if you find such a thing, you're good.
Sorry Ron, having gone through all your explanations about this method, I'm afraid that i still don't really completely understand what you mean. This comparison&omission stuff really annoy me. Will you be so kind to analyze two more sentences using this method?
Thank you so much!!
- tim
- Course Students
- Posts: 5665
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:08 am
- Location: Southwest Airlines, seat 21C
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
We might be able to help if you can come up with some sentences you've found in our CAT exams or GMAT Prep where this issue is relevant.
Tim Sanders
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Follow this link for some important tips to get the most out of your forum experience:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forums/a-few-tips-t31405.html
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Follow this link for some important tips to get the most out of your forum experience:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forums/a-few-tips-t31405.html
- JunjunZ928
- Students
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 10:24 pm
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
I just found this helpful post, saving me tons of time summarizing parallel structure. Thanks, Ron.
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
you're welcome.
- HuiL897
- Students
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:49 pm
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
--
gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997.
1/
right-hand element = "[gas prices] in 1997"
(meaning of the pronoun is obvious, i hope)
2/
we want to compare prices, so the set-up is ok
3/
nothing works on the other side. we need "gas prices in 2007" (in one piece), but only "gas prices" is there.
nope.
--
Hi instructors,
I still feel confused with the example above.
Ron said the sentence "gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997" is incorrect, because "those in 1997" has no parallel word on the other side. Only "gas prices" is there.
But I found this sentence "Prices at the x level are only 2.5 percent higher now than those of a year ago" in OG. It is a part of the right answer choice in OG. I know it is not allowed to post OG questions in the forum, so I changed a little...
Don't these two sentences have exactly the same structure? Why is one right while the other wrong?
Please kindly clarify.
Thanks in advance!
gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997.
1/
right-hand element = "[gas prices] in 1997"
(meaning of the pronoun is obvious, i hope)
2/
we want to compare prices, so the set-up is ok
3/
nothing works on the other side. we need "gas prices in 2007" (in one piece), but only "gas prices" is there.
nope.
--
Hi instructors,
I still feel confused with the example above.
Ron said the sentence "gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997" is incorrect, because "those in 1997" has no parallel word on the other side. Only "gas prices" is there.
But I found this sentence "Prices at the x level are only 2.5 percent higher now than those of a year ago" in OG. It is a part of the right answer choice in OG. I know it is not allowed to post OG questions in the forum, so I changed a little...
Don't these two sentences have exactly the same structure? Why is one right while the other wrong?
Please kindly clarify.
Thanks in advance!
- uae918
- Students
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:41 pm
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
HuiL897 Wrote:--
gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997.
1/
right-hand element = "[gas prices] in 1997"
(meaning of the pronoun is obvious, i hope)
2/
we want to compare prices, so the set-up is ok
3/
nothing works on the other side. we need "gas prices in 2007" (in one piece), but only "gas prices" is there.
nope.
--
Hi instructors,
I still feel confused with the example above.
Ron said the sentence "gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997" is incorrect, because "those in 1997" has no parallel word on the other side. Only "gas prices" is there.
But I found this sentence "Prices at the x level are only 2.5 percent higher now than those of a year ago" in OG. It is a part of the right answer choice in OG. I know it is not allowed to post OG questions in the forum, so I changed a little...
Don't these two sentences have exactly the same structure? Why is one right while the other wrong?
Please kindly clarify.
Thanks in advance!
I also have the same question. Can any expert respond? Thanks so much!
- uae918
- Students
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:41 pm
Re: Ron's Advice on Comparison and Omission
yuanT918 Wrote:HuiL897 Wrote:--
gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997.
1/
right-hand element = "[gas prices] in 1997"
(meaning of the pronoun is obvious, i hope)
2/
we want to compare prices, so the set-up is ok
3/
nothing works on the other side. we need "gas prices in 2007" (in one piece), but only "gas prices" is there.
nope.
--
Hi instructors,
I still feel confused with the example above.
Ron said the sentence "gas prices were higher in 2007 than those in 1997" is incorrect, because "those in 1997" has no parallel word on the other side. Only "gas prices" is there.
But I found this sentence "Prices at the x level are only 2.5 percent higher now than those of a year ago" in OG. It is a part of the right answer choice in OG. I know it is not allowed to post OG questions in the forum, so I changed a little...
Don't these two sentences have exactly the same structure? Why is one right while the other wrong?
Please kindly clarify.
Thanks in advance!
I also have the same question. Can any expert respond? Thanks so much!
Sorry please disregard. I have found the answer in another post! The title of the post is "The word omitted in comparison" in case anyone after me also have similar questions.
thanks