Confusions about Comparison

[JhanasC520]

Dear Ron,

I am confused about two sentences which are related with comparison. In order to better exemplify my confusions, I create sentences below, Please correct me if I am wrong.

First question:
1：More apples are eaten by lily than by Sally
2：More apples are eaten by lily than are eaten by Sally

Is there any meaning difference between these two sentences? just as you have said in previous posts that anything in a sentence can be compared (nouns, infinitives, verb phrases and etc.), In the first sentence, the comparison is between "by lily" and "by Sally". In the second setence, the comparison is between "are eaten by lily" and "are eaten by Sally".

I am asking this question because I read a similar sentence from OG, I am not trying to edit the correct answer but trying to understnad the meaning difference between these two usages.

Second question:

this question is from a OG sentence and I will rewrite this sentence according to the rules of forum.

Oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because buyers are paying more for crude oil than they were last year.

Again, I am not trying to edit the correct answer,but to figure out the meaning difference.

My question is that what is the meaning difference if "because" clause" write like this: buyers are paying more for crude oil than last year......Its seems that this expression also makes sense.

If there is no meaning difference,whether these two expressions are interchangeable?


thanks for your patience and help in answering my questions!

[JhanasC520]

Dear Ron,

Here, I found another question about comparison. I once read these two sentences from newspapers maybe and I found I do not quite understand the part compared in the sentence.

There’s no doubt that he was essentially an angry adolescent who drank a great deal more than was good for him.

I don't understand "more than was good for him" is compared to which part in the former part of the sentence. as you have mentioned previously, any part in a sentence can be compared. but I fail to find that there is "be" part to be equivalent to "was good for him"

similar structures:

Students often try to make their vocabularies seem bigger than they actually are by using a thesaurus to beef up the paper they write.

Internet enables people to contact with each other at speeds much higher than are currently possible.

[RonPurewal]

Dear Ron,

I am confused about two sentences which are related with comparison. In order to better exemplify my confusions, I create sentences below, Please correct me if I am wrong.

First question:
1：More apples are eaten by lily than by Sally
2：More apples are eaten by lily than are eaten by Sally

These are equivalent.

Both are technically ok. You won't see a correct answer that looks like #2, though, because #2 is needlessly inefficient.

[RonPurewal]

My question is that what is the meaning difference if "because" clause" write like this: buyers are paying more for crude oil than last year......Its seems that this expression also makes sense.

Something needs to correspond to the thing after the signal ("than").

Here, there's nothing in the first half to correspond to "last year". So, this doesn't work.

If you saw Buyers are paying more for xxx than they did last year ... that would be fine.

[RonPurewal]

MORE IMPORTANTLY—
Comparisons are a "beauty contest". You should judge answer choices relative to each other.
Right now you're trying to judge individual sentences. That's not a good idea; individual judgments demand the skill set of a professional editor. Comparing the given answer choices is MUCH easier.

[RonPurewal]

Dear Ron,

Here, I found another question about comparison. I once read these two sentences from newspapers maybe and I found I do not quite understand the part compared in the sentence.

There’s no doubt that he was essentially an angry adolescent who drank a great deal more than was good for him.

I don't understand "more than was good for him" is compared to which part in the former part of the sentence. as you have mentioned previously, any part in a sentence can be compared. but I fail to find that there is "be" part to be equivalent to "was good for him"

There are a few comparisons that don't strictly contain parallel elements. I can't give you an exhaustive list, but here are a couple of examples:

Humans' ability to survive extreme caloric restriction is turning out to be much more profound than was originally hypothesized.

Because of the music festival, there will be much more traffic than usual this weekend.

These will almost certainly be non-issues in actual GMAT problems, since none of the 5 choices will contain explicitly parallel elements.

[JhanasC520]

Dear Ron,

Here, I found another question about comparison. I once read these two sentences from newspapers maybe and I found I do not quite understand the part compared in the sentence.

There’s no doubt that he was essentially an angry adolescent who drank a great deal more than was good for him.

I don't understand "more than was good for him" is compared to which part in the former part of the sentence. as you have mentioned previously, any part in a sentence can be compared. but I fail to find that there is "be" part to be equivalent to "was good for him"

There are a few comparisons that don't strictly contain parallel elements. I can't give you an exhaustive list, but here are a couple of examples:

Humans' ability to survive extreme caloric restriction is turning out to be much more profound than was originally hypothesized.

Because of the music festival, there will be much more traffic than usual this weekend.

These will almost certainly be non-issues in actual GMAT problems, since none of the 5 choices will contain explicitly parallel elements.

Dear Ron,

Thanks for your reply! You are so nice and patient that I found almost every question however small it is, you will answer it.

But, I am so sad to know that there are some exceptions in comparison, making me feel confused next time when I come across comparison since I might fail to know whether parallel elements are needed such as in this post: post107779.html?hilit=an%20alliance%20between%20three%20major%20personal%20computer%20companies%20and&sid=2bfdae643141483abfbaacf36302ccf6#p107779

[RonPurewal]

* Language has to be capable of expressing every single thought that anyone ever might want to write.
That's a huge task. Needless to say, it would be impossible if every construction followed perfectly mechanical rules.
Lots of very smart people have tried to construct "perfectly logical languages". All of them have failed miserably.

* If you see a problem like the one in your link, there will be zero answer choices with actual parallel elements.
If that's the case, then just look for something else.

[aflaamM589]

Dear Ron,

I am confused about two sentences which are related with comparison. In order to better exemplify my confusions, I create sentences below, Please correct me if I am wrong.

First question:
1：More apples are eaten by lily than by Sally
2：More apples are eaten by lily than are eaten by Sally

These are equivalent.

Both are technically ok. You won't see a correct answer that looks like #2, though, because #2 is needlessly inefficient.

Hello Ron,
Is the following version also correct?
More apples are eaten by lily than Sally

Moreover,you said above that the second version is needlessly inefficient( because it repeats the verb).
According to my understanding( developed by reading your posts), verb should be repeated if their is shift in time frame, something like

More apples are eaten by lily today than were eaten by Sally last weak.--> here their is explicit shift in time, so verb should be repeated.

Moreover, can you please tell when the subject is allowed to be repeated or should be repeated? What are the conditions?
i.e is following also correct?
More apples are eaten by lily today than they were eaten by Sally last weak

-------------------------------------------------------

My question is that what is the meaning difference if "because" clause" write like this: buyers are paying more for crude oil than last year......Its seems that this expression also makes sense.

Something needs to correspond to the thing after the signal ("than").

Here, there's nothing in the first half to correspond to "last year". So, this doesn't work.

If you saw Buyers are paying more for xxx than they did last year ... that would be fine.

buyers are paying more for crude oil now than last year-->
still incorrect, because there is explicit shift in time so verb is required to be repeated,right Ron?

buyers are paying more for crude oil now than they were last year--> correct, right Ron?
buyers are paying more for crude oil now than they were paying last year--> correct, right Ron?
Ron can you tell, when participle is allowed to drop?
My understanding is that participle can be dropped in the second part of comparison only if it had appeared in first part of the comparison,
Is my understanding correct?
--------------------------------------------------------------

Ron:
Buyers are paying more for xxx than they did last year

here [now] is implied because of tense--are Ving( present progressive or whatever it is called)

similarly,
airports are a larger source of pollution than they were once believed to be
here [now] is implied because of tense--simple present or whatever it is called)

Is my understanding correct?

Thank you very much
I really appreciate your guidance

[RonPurewal]

Hello Ron,
Is the following version also correct?
More apples are eaten by lily than Sally

this would be fine, although a good writer would probably include the second "by" just for clarity.

remember—this is a multiple-choice test. you are thinking about how to make decisions that you won't have to make.

More apples are eaten by lily today than they were eaten by Sally last weak

this is not a proper sentence, but, i'm not sure this is relevant to the exam. have you seen this kind of thing tested in an official problem?

[RonPurewal]

buyers are paying more for crude oil now than last year-->
still incorrect, because there is explicit shift in time so verb is required to be repeated,right Ron?

again... this is a multiple-choice test.
you are still thinking about how to write these sentences. don't think about that. it's basically irrelevant to the process of picking a multiple-choice option.

if this is the best of the options given, then, pick it.
if you DO have another choice that says "...are paying more now than they were last year", then, pick that one.

[RonPurewal]

similarly,
airports are a larger source of pollution than they were once believed to be
here [now] is implied because of tense--simple present or whatever it is called)

i can't tell what you are asking.

if your question is "Does the first part describe something in the present?", then the answer is yes, but, i'm guessing that you wouldn't have to ask about something as basic as that. so... i can't really tell what you are trying to ask.