can somebody help me out with this question?

[RonPurewal]

sure.

[thanghnvn]

I agree B is best
but in B, the subject of the second clause is cut off.

how we can infer the subject of the second clause? we can infer the subjec on what basis.

pls, explain

[YuY283]

Hi Ron,

sorry if this has been already discussed. I am wondering if my understanding is right:

- fewer than (..the number of people who..) have been killed by bee stings.

My understanding is that the part in the bracket (the number of people who) has been left out as it is understood. Is my understanding right?

Thanks!

Your understanding is indeed right!

Hi Ron,

If this understanding is right, why we use "fewer" here? the number of people who have been killed by sharks is FEWER than the number of people who have been killed by bee stings. Is this a right sentence? From my understanding, the sentence should be: fewer people have been killed by sharks than have been killed by bee stings.

Please help explain, thanks!

[sdfsdfsdfs481]

Hi Ron,

You said that
You can't say "Things are less/fewer/more/greater than other things", ever, about any things (or people or animals or whatever).
But a numerical number is less/fewer/more/greater than other numerical number is ok.

Then why (B) is correct? I'm confused because the intend meaning of (B) is
Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark
is fewer than
some people have been killed by bee strings

It is still the structure of

Things are less/fewer/more/greater than other things

, right?

Besides, I'm also confused about the usage of less/fewer/more/greater.
When to use less(greater) and fewer(more)? It is quite confusing.

[RonPurewal]

It is still the structure of

Things are less/fewer/more/greater than other things

, right?

no, i'm talking about that EXACT structure. that prohibition DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND that EXACT structure, in which 'things' are NOUNS.

i.e., if you wrote
The people killed by xxxx are fewer than those killed by yyyy
then NOPE.

the sentence at hand ('...fewer than have been killed by yyyy') is not 'NOUNS are fewer than OTHER NOUNS'. so that warning does not apply.

[RonPurewal]

Besides, I'm also confused about the usage of less/fewer/more/greater.
When to use less(greater) and fewer(more)? It is quite confusing.

LESS/FEWER is straightforward:
• fewer for things you can COUNT
• less for 'continuous' things (e.g., water, meat, respect, food, etc.)
this distinction is both BASIC and CLEAR... so it's the kind of thing that actually deserves your attention on this exam.

--

if you see MORE/GREATER, it is PROBABLY A DISTRACTION from easier, more fundamental, and/or more black-and-white things.

i wrote some things about this distinction here. (i don't normally cross-post from other forums, but it would be far too awkward and effortful to reproduce everything here.)

http://www.beatthegmat.com/greater-vs-m ... tml#381739

http://www.beatthegmat.com/although-the ... tml#322210

...but ALWAYS look for something easier before considering anything like this.

[asker]

Don't we need some demonstrative pronoun here to refer back to people, which is absent in B. Thus I chose E.

Would "fewer than those" be a correct answer? Please explain.

[this post has been edited from the original version]

when you consider parallel constructions, your main goal is just to pick the choice with the best parallelism.
if you were a writer, then you would need all kinds of subtle intuition about this kind of thing -- because writers don't get multiple-choice options!
but you get multiple-choice options, so we needn't complicate the issue any more than necessary.

in the correct answer, we have "have been killed by x" and "have been killed by y".
perfect.
you really aren't going to do any better than that!

in the choice with "those killed by bee stings" -- note that we don't have "people killed by the great white shark" in the other part.

this is really annoying at first, but, once you get used to this mentality, you'll find that it's one of the easier things to do on SC.
if you are a "quant person", you should be able to do these sorts of eliminations very quickly, because they operate on essentially mathematical principles (unlike, say, idiom or modifier issues).

Also, can someone comment on the difference between usage of comma and hyphen in the options? When would each be correct or incorrect?

it's not a hyphen, actually; it's a dash. hyphens are shorter, and are used within two-part words (such as "two-part").
in this context, the dash essentially serves the same purpose as a comma. the only difference is that you don't use dashes at random; you use them when there is some special emphasis or irony (or both) in what you're saying.

example:
Joe, who is from Miami, complained about the cold of the Las Vegas winter. --> no irony; this makes perfect sense, since las vegas is much colder than miami in winter. therefore, no reason to use dashes.
Joe -- who is from Duluth -- complained about the cold of the Las Vegas winter. --> extreme irony, since duluth is about 70 degrees colder than las vegas in the winter.

same sort of deal here: there's considerable irony in the fact that the formidable shark has fewer kills under its belt than does the cute lil yellow fuzzy bee.

as a bonus, the dash also adds a degree of clarity, since "the great white shark" is already followed by one comma + appositive modifier; adding another modifier after another comma would muddy the waters a bit too much for my liking (and, apparently, for the test writers' liking as well).

Considering the following two together: 1)Ron's use of dash above (some special emphasis, serves the same purpose as a comma) , and 2) Thursday with Ron once mentioned the use of dash see the picture below:



①
my take-away is: if there is only one dash in the sentence, it should run until the end of the sentence.

So for example of an MGMAT CAT question:
"In recent years, scholars of psychology have begun to examine more seriously the notion, first proposed by John Keats, of ""negative capability""—the idea that maintaining calmness amid uncertainty and doubt, rather than experiencing an anxious urge to find solutions, is a genuine talent and possibly even a therapeutic tool.
A. In recent years, scholars of psychology have begun to examine more seriously the notion, first proposed by John Keats, of ""negative capability""—the
B. Proposed first by John Keats, the notion of ""negative capability,"" which scholars of psychology began to examine more seriously in recent years: this is the
C. The notion of ""negative capability,"" which John Keats first proposed and scholars of psychology recently began to take more seriously—the
D. Proposed first by John Keats, and recently scholars of psychology began to take it more seriously, the notion of ""negative capability"" is the
E. First proposed by John Keats, scholars of psychology have recently begun to take the notion of ""negative capability"" more seriously; this is the "

I was thinking one dash run to the end, and serve as a comma, so if there is only one dash, and any option with "dash+sentence" is automatically wrong. So I eliminate A at the first glance, which is essentially the right answer.

②
Another understanding of the Thursday with Ron:
1. Two Dash
1.1 dash + emphasizing phrase + dash
1.2 dash + emphasizing sentence + dash
1.3 dash + clarified phrase + dash
1.4 dash + clarified sentence + dash
2. Sentence + dash (Must be sentence before dash???)
2.1 dash + emphasizing phrase
2.2 dash + emphasizing sentence
2.3 dash + clarified phrase
2.4 dash + clarified sentence


The above 8 combination are all correct.

So Ron,
Between my understanding of ① and ②, which one indeed is right?

[RonPurewal]

i'm sorry, but that post is just way too long. i can't tell what you are trying to ask.

[RonPurewal]

if your question is "what can dashes do?", then the answer is 'just about anything'.
dashes (or a single dash, if the offset part runs to the end of the sentence) can substitute for commas, colons, semicolons, parentheses, and more.
sometimes they even replace combinations of these.

e.g., in problem #118 in the 2016 OG (= problem #132 in the 13th/2015 OG),
xxxxx—yyyyyy—zzzzz
is roughly equivalent to
xxxxx (yyyyyy), zzzzz.

the point is that, wherever they appear, dashes themselves won't be the problem. instead you should look for other problems in the surrounding stuff.

[asker]

i'm sorry, but that post is just way too long. i can't tell what you are trying to ask.

I actually summarized the my questions into a new post here:
in-recent-years-scholars-of-psychology-have-begun-t32529.html

[asker]

if your question is "what can dashes do?", then the answer is 'just about anything'.
dashes (or a single dash, if the offset part runs to the end of the sentence) can substitute for commas, colons, semicolons, parentheses, and more.
sometimes they even replace combinations of these.

e.g., in problem #118 in the 2016 OG (= problem #132 in the 13th/2015 OG),
xxxxx—yyyyyy—zzzzz
is roughly equivalent to
xxxxx (yyyyyy), zzzzz.

the point is that, wherever they appear, dashes themselves won't be the problem. instead you should look for other problems in the surrounding stuff.

My point is, I tried to eliminate by the judgement of dash. I originally thought it served as comma, so as long as I saw a complete sentence after dash, it automatically wrong, like eliminating a run-on sentence.
But since you mentioned the usage of semicolons, seems like my thought process is wrong. Dash can connect two sentence.

[RonPurewal]

mechanically, there isn't much that dashes can't do. as i said above, you should look for issues elsewhere.

dashes could be problematic if they are illogical.
for instance, if a sentence contains a contrast, then you need a transition that indicates contrast (but, while, although, etc.); dashes alone can't do that job.

...but the chance that dashes will be ungrammatical is basically nil.

[CrystalSpringston]

Hello Ron,

Can you please explain what is wrong with E, I am not clear why Ones is incorrect.

Thanks,

Vineet

first, i'm about 99% sure that we are not allowed to use "ones" to refer to people.

second, i'm also about 99% sure that "THE ones" must refer back to "THE some other noun".

Hi Ron,
If this is the case, then "one“ is not allowed to refer to people either, correct?
We often say and listen sentences such as " One can afford a house easily in Indiana", or " I dislike the one smoking a lot".
Just want to get further confirmation from you.
Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

the first of those would be fine.

you'll also quite often see sentences like 'Person X was one of the most famous people in her field.'

your second sentence ('the one smoking...') couldn't really occur in the context of this exam, since it would require too much prior information to make sense. (remember, SC sentences have to make sense alone.)

[chengkeh798]

Hello Ron,

Can you please explain what is wrong with E, I am not clear why Ones is incorrect.

Thanks,

Vineet

first, i'm about 99% sure that we are not allowed to use "ones" to refer to people.

second, i'm also about 99% sure that "THE ones" must refer back to "THE some other noun".

Hi, Ron. I understand one indicates an indefinite copy or a single indefinite part of a collection. Does that mean "ones" is always wrong and can not be used in written English? Thanks a lot