PREPSC:babies were born to women

[tim]

1) What "omission" are you talking about?

2) Sentence correction is ALWAYS about finding errors and NEVER about actually correcting something. So if you ever find yourself asking how to fix an incorrect answer choice you are most likely wasting time that could be better spent learning how to identify errors. If you ever want to know how to correct an incorrect answer choice, the answer is whatever the correct answer choice says. :)

[cnhelen]

the correct sentence:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than under it.

so the complete sentense (with the ellipses) should be:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than (babies were born to women) under it.
Correct?

and can i say:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than those (were) born to women under it. ??

Thanks in advance...

[RonPurewal]

the correct sentence:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than under it.

so the complete sentense (with the ellipses) should be:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than (babies were born to women) under it.
Correct?

and can i say:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than those (were) born to women under it. ??

Thanks in advance...

no, you can't write the sentence like that.
but, as tim said above, don't try to "fix" the sentences. the above sentence is incorrect for reasons that the gmat exam doesn't test, so it's not worth worrying about.

in general, you shouldn't think of comparison sentences as "omissions"; you should think of them as finding elements that match most closely to their counterparts in the other part of the sentence.
in this case, the point is that "over the age of 30" and "under it" are exactly parallel elements, creating a sensible comparison. that's all you really have to find.

really, that's it. it's a lot simpler than many people on here seem to think.
just examine the other choices and see whether there's anything parallel to them.

* (b) ... than born under it
nope"”not parallel to anything. i.e., there's no "born over the age of thirty" (and, even if there was, the meaning would be absurd"”all babies are zero years old when they are born).

* (c) ... than they were under it
nope"”not parallel to anything. i.e., there's no "xxxxx were over the age of 30".

* (d) ... than there had been under it
nope"”not parallel to anything. i.e., there's no "xxxx had been over the age of 30".

* (e) ... than had been born under it
nope"”not parallel to anything. same problem as in (b).

see? that's all you have to do here. (a) is the only answer choice with stuff that matches... so, (a) wins.

don't overcomplicate the issue!

[cnhelen]

don't overcomplicate the issue!

yeah, you're right......i feel better now...haha...

Thanks Ron !!!

[tim]

Good advice!

[HanzZ]

Hello experts,

I am just wondering whether choice b will be correct if it reads like the following:

According to public health officials, in 1998 Massachusetts became the first state in which more babies were
born to women over the age of thirty than born to women under it.

I am trying to understand whether parallelism is flexible in terms of "inclusiveness" of the elements on both sides of the parallel marker. On the contrary, the correct answer a is "less inclusive", if you will:

According to public health officials, in 1998 Massachusetts became the first state in which more babies were born to women over the age of thirty than under it.

I would like to know if my above thinking process is logical.

Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

Your answer would be fine, albeit wordy (the repetition of "born to women" is unnecessary).

You wouldn't face a choice between yours and the original, though, since neither is incorrect.

[thanghnvn]

thank you, Ron,
your analysis is wonderful

B is incorrect and another way to realize that B is wrong is that the elliptical/replaced phrase must be one phrase.we can not cut off some words in a place and cut off other words in another place

for example

I learn gmat in a way more efficient in US than I do in a way in Vietnam

the full sentence should be

I learn gmat in a way more efficient in us than I learn gmat in a way efficient in Vietnam

in above sentence, we cut off/replace "learn gmat" and "efficient". the 2 phrases are at 2 places and the ellipsis is not correct.

According to public health officials, in 1998 Massachusetts became the first state in which more babies were born to women over the age of thirty// than// under it.
A. than
B. than born

the full sentence should be

"more babies were born to women over the age of thirty than babies were born to women under the age of thirty

in choice B, we cut off "babies were" and "to women under the age of thirty". these are 2 phrases at a 2 places. this ellipsis is wrong.

In choice A, the cut off phrase is one continuous phrase. this ellipsis is correct.

is my thinking correct?

[RonPurewal]

No. It's not possible to construct a "full sentence" here. This is why comparisons look the way they do!

Don't think of comparisons as "omissions", because, well, they aren't.
Just look for things that are parallel to other things.

(Your "full sentence" is incorrectly constructed; it's not possible to follow "than" with a complete sentence.
Just about any attempt to create a "full sentence", as you're trying to do here, will fail similarly"”because there's no "full sentence" in the first place.)

[thanghnvn]

the correct sentence:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than under it.

so the complete sentense (with the ellipses) should be:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than (babies were born to women) under it.
Correct?

and can i say:
More babies were born to women over the age of thirty than those (were) born to women under it. ??

Thanks in advance...

no, you can't write the sentence like that.
but, as tim said above, don't try to "fix" the sentences. the above sentence is incorrect for reasons that the gmat exam doesn't test, so it's not worth worrying about.

in general, you shouldn't think of comparison sentences as "omissions"; you should think of them as finding elements that match most closely to their counterparts in the other part of the sentence.
in this case, the point is that "over the age of 30" and "under it" are exactly parallel elements, creating a sensible comparison. that's all you really have to find.

really, that's it. it's a lot simpler than many people on here seem to think.
just examine the other choices and see whether there's anything parallel to them.

* (b) ... than born under it
nope"”not parallel to anything. i.e., there's no "born over the age of thirty" (and, even if there was, the meaning would be absurd"”all babies are zero years old when they are born).

* (c) ... than they were under it
nope"”not parallel to anything. i.e., there's no "xxxxx were over the age of 30".

* (d) ... than there had been under it
nope"”not parallel to anything. i.e., there's no "xxxx had been over the age of 30".

* (e) ... than had been born under it
nope"”not parallel to anything. same problem as in (b).

see? that's all you have to do here. (a) is the only answer choice with stuff that matches... so, (a) wins.

don't overcomplicate the issue!

Thank you , Ron, your above explanation is wonderful. I want to summarize the the ellipsis.

- the cut off part must be present somewhere in the sentence
- the remaining part must be paralel to a phrase so that the remaining part creates a clear meaning OR, the remaining part itself is clear in meaning and dose not need to be parallel to any phrase. we need the remaining part to be parallel with some phrase so that the remaining part is clear in meaning.

from 2 above points, the following is also correct.
According to public health officials, in 1998 Massachusetts became the first state in which more babies were born to women over the age of thirty//than the babies who go to school in 1997

am I correct? ron, do you agree to the 2 points above

[RonPurewal]

Your summary points are basically accurate.

Ironically, they provide the reason why your example is incorrect.

According to public health officials, in 1998 Massachusetts became the first state in which more babies were born to women over the age of thirty//than the babies who go to school in 1997

The orange part is a full clause, with a noun and a verb. "Babies were born..."

The blue part is just a noun with a modifier. It's just "babies...", not "babies DID anything".

Not parallel.

[thanghnvn]

I am confused too. how b is wrong?

I think

the cut off, ellipsis phrase should be one phrase. we can not cut off two phrases at two places in the second clause of comparison. this is the lession from choice b.

[tim]

Please read the entire thread.

[belal.finance.du]

[redacted]

[RonPurewal]

the problem you posted is from OG. we can't host or discuss OG problems here.
also, each discussion thread is about a single problem. posts about other problems -- even if those problems are from allowed sources -- will be removed.

please familiarize yourself with the rules of the forum before you post. thanks.