can somebody help me out with this question?

[RonPurewal]

Only seven people this century have been killled by GWS, fewer than those have been killed by bee stings. -> Is it considered parallel?

Still wrong. You can't say "Things are fewer than other things", ever, about any things (or people or animals or whatever).
I don't have a solid explanation for you -- think of it as an idiom, if you want to -- but you can't.

In New York City, men are fewer than women. No.
In New York City, there are fewer men than women. Yes.
New York City has fewer men than women. Yes.

By the way, this will likely have zero importance on the GMAT, because, as stated above, all you need to do is look at the parallelism of the things in the comparison. But, if nothing else, it will help you become a better writer of English.

Most importantly, do not create your own versions of GMAC's sentences.
Don't do it.
Ever.
It's a complete waste of your time.

In 99% of cases when students "tweak" GMAC's sentences, their versions are wrong, for reasons that GMAC does not test. (The range of things tested on SC is a very, very small fraction of all issues in English.)
So, we end up with a situation that's like "No, that's wrong, but you don't have to know why."

Like this one.

Don't do it.

[zoe.hao]

good call. i know the problem to which you're making an analogy here (it's the bihar problem from OG).

i guess "that of" has a little more leeway in the exact parallelism department.
i.e. you can put "that OF" or "those OF" in parallel to anything that suggests a possessive structure. or at least that's what we learn from this problem...

in any case, you can't use "IN any other...", because there's nothing to which the preposition IN can be parallel.

Ron, I've figured out the "protein in rice" question from OG, but in this question I cannot find the two things compared with each other. Please help!

[RonPurewal]

Hi,
There are currently 63 posts on this thread. The comparison is explained copiously therein.
Please read the thread. Thank you.

In fact, you shouldn't even have to read past the first page of the thread. On the first page, there's a post (by me) in which the exact matching structures are written out.

[Suapplle]

hi,Ron,I am confusing about the usage of "the ones",how to use it correctly ? Please give some examples,thanks a lot!

[RonPurewal]

hi,Ron,I am confusing about the usage of "the ones",how to use it correctly ? Please give some examples,thanks a lot!

"The one(s)" is something that's typically used when it would be extremely awkward to use "that" or "those".

E.g.,
I'm looking for a jacket unlike the one that I bought last year.
Try putting "that" in the place of "the one" and watch what happens (not good). So, here, you'd see "the one".

If it's reasonably possible to use "that" or "those", though, then you should use "that" or "those".

This will never be the only reason why a wrong answer choice is wrong. ("Fewer than the ones" is also nonsense / unidiomatic usage -- you can't say "xxxx are fewer than yyyyy".)

[thanghnvn]

Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the //movies"”less than those //killed by bee stings.
A. movies"”less than those
B. movies"”fewer than have been
C. movies, which is less than those
D. movies, a number lower than the people
E. movies, fewer than the ones

the oa is B.
pls discuss the oa. pls, do not discuss why other choices are wrong. if you want to know why other choices are wrong, pls, look at the other posting in this forum

I want to learn from the oa as Ron told us

the modifier "fewer than have been" in B certainly must refer to "seven persons" but that modifier also modify the whole preceding clause because if that modifier modify only "seven person", we can move this modifier to a place close to "seven persons"

Only seven person, fewer than THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE have been killed by bee stings, have been killed by great while sharks.

is this sentence make sense. I do not think so.

so, "fewer than have been killed by bee stings" also modify the whole preceding clause. IS THAT RIGHT.

if that is right, this kind of modifier modify both "seven persons" and the preceding clause. this kind of modifier modify both noun and verb.

the similar modifier is " learning gmat" in the following sentence which is certainly correct

Learning gmat, I make my English better

"learning gmat" refer to both "I" and the following clause. so, it modifies both noun and verb

what I want you to confirm is

"fewer than have been" in choice B is a kind of modifier which can modify both noun and verb/clause. is that righ?

[RonPurewal]

In this context, it's clear that "fewer than have been xxxx" is describing "7 people".

It's not possible to break up "7 people have been killed by the great white shark" without obscuring or destroying the meaning of the sentence, so, this modifier is placed as close as possible to "7 people".

[RonPurewal]

Thanghnvn,

pls discuss the oa. pls, do not discuss why other choices are wrong. if you want to know why other choices are wrong, pls, look at the other posting in this forum

This sort of officious tone is absolutely unacceptable here. You are not a moderator of this forum; you cannot tell other users what to do or what not to do.

This forum is here for your questions and polite, professional commentary.

Any further posts written in this kind of tone will be summarily deleted.

[thanghnvn]

Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the //movies"”less than those //killed by bee stings.
A. movies"”less than those
B. movies"”fewer than have been
C. movies, which is less than those
D. movies, a number lower than the people
E. movies, fewer than the ones

what I mean is that do the 2 following sentences are the same?
Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the //movies"”fewer than have been//killed by bee stings. (the OA)

and

Only seven people,fewer than have been killed by bee stings, this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the movies

the first sentence is the OA. The second sentence is the sentence in which I move "fewer than have been killed by bee stings" to a place close to " only seven persons"

in the second sentence " fewer than ...stings" modify only "only seven persons..." so, "fewer than...stings" is an adjective phrase.

in the fist sentence" fewer than... stings" modify both "only seven persons" and the preceding clause , so, "fewer than...stings" are both adjective phrase and adverb phrase.

is that right?

if that is right, the meanings in the two sentences are different.

my question is the meanings in the two sentences are the same or different.

[thanghnvn]

Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the //movies"”less than those //killed by bee stings.
A. movies"”less than those
B. movies"”fewer than have been
C. movies, which is less than those
D. movies, a number lower than the people
E. movies, fewer than the ones

what I mean is that do the 2 following sentences are the same?
Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the //movies"”fewer than have been//killed by bee stings. (the OA)

and

Only seven people,fewer than have been killed by bee stings, this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the movies

the first sentence is the OA. The second sentence is the sentence in which I move "fewer than have been killed by bee stings" to a place close to " only seven persons"

in the second sentence " fewer than ...stings" modify only "only seven persons..." so, "fewer than...stings" is an adjective phrase.

in the fist sentence" fewer than... stings" modify both "only seven persons" and the preceding clause , so, "fewer than...stings" are both adjective phrase and adverb phrase.

is that right?

if that is right, the meanings in the two sentences are different.

my question is the meanings in the two sentences are the same or different.
pls, explain

[RonPurewal]

Only seven people,fewer than have been killed by bee stings, this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the movies

First, this sentence is written in an order that doesn't make sense. The sentence only makes sense if the statistic is presented first, and then compared with the other statistic that makes the irony apparent.
This version of the sentence is just confusing. (The reader would be wondering, "Why is the writer talking about bee stings right now?" (S)he wolud have to piece the logic back together backward, and would almost certainly have to read the sentence multiple times.)

Also, it's no longer clear what "this century" is modifying, since it is now sandwiched between the two statistics. It could theoretically refer to either of them.

[RonPurewal]

the first sentence is the OA. The second sentence is the sentence in which I move "fewer than have been killed by bee stings" to a place close to " only seven persons"

More importantly"”Do not edit GMAC's sentences.

First"”and most importantly"”editing is a skill that's irrelevant to this exam. All you need to do is tell which choices are right and which choices are wrong.
As an analogy, if editing the sentences is like performing surgery, you do NOT have to learn how to do surgery. You just have to learn how to tell whether a patient needs surgery"”a much easier task.

This problem is a pefect example of the dangers involved in "editing" GMAC's sentences.
This problem is a straightforward case of parallelism: You see "have been killed by xxxx", so you pick "have been killed by yyyy" to match it.
That's all you need here. By shuffling around pieces of the official answer, you've created difficulties that not only detract from your focus on the actual problem, but also add no value to your consideration of the problem. Not good.

[RonPurewal]

Sorry, for question #2, I want to add sth.
Except the case that "˜S. V. O. , / "” , conjunction + S.V.O. ’
conjunction can be used to connect 2 separate sentence.

I have no idea what this means. Should there be words between these symbols?

[RonPurewal]

Hi, Ron
I am really confused about the use of conjunction in gmat..
I read a sentence like this: 'sentence A, if only because+sentence B'
in my opinion, if only is a conjunction, because is another conjunction.
How can 2 conjunctions appear in just one sentence?
Hope you can explain this as well.
Thanks in advance, Ron.

I can't answer this question; I'm not familiar with any formal grammatical terminology/analysis beyond basic parts of speech (noun, verb, adjective, adverb).

If you see an unfamiliar construction that's acknowledged as correct, your best bet is simply to...
... accept it,
... remember its basic form, so that you don't mistakenly reject it if you see it again later.

[cshen02]

e. movies, fewer than the ones

Got torn by this prob at first, but finally got what it tests us on. Just need more clarification on E. Is "the ones" used correctly here? I assume it refers back to "people", so we are saying the people killed by shark are fewer than people kill by bee stings. Sounds right to me.

B makes the best parallelism because the sentence implies shark kill and bee sting kill happen over the same time period, and B restates the right verb.

What if the elements under comparison are in different time frame?

Is there a general rule on this?

Thanks!