Providing initial evidence that

[siddharthaganguly]

thanks a lot for your quick response Ron..!!

sometimes "ignorance is bliss.." :)

[ChrisB]

You're welcome!

Thanks,
Chris

[violetwind]

GPrep

Providing initial evidence that airports are a larger source of pollution than they were once believed to be, environmentalists in Chicago report that the total amount of pollutant emitted by annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice as much as that which is being emitted annually by all motor vehicles in the Chicago Metro area

A) as much as that which is being emitted annually by all
B) as much annually as is emitted by the
C) as much compared to what is annually emitted by all
D) that emitted annually by all
E) that emitted annually compared to

OA : D
Can some one explain as what's going in the question and each of the wrong answer choices ?

I narrowed it down to B and D and chose B.
My reasoning
A) awkward ..that which
C) As much as .. as much ..what is wrong

Hi Ron,

Thanks for your great explanation on the grammar point about twice vs. twice as much as. I'm now clear about B's problem. I know for this sentence "twice as much as" is redundant, I just wanna know the right usage of this phrase, could you kindly advise whether it is right if I write: the total amount of pollutant emitted by annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice as much as by all motor vehicles in the Chicago Metro area ?

the blue parts are parallel and the red part is ommited in the latter part of the parallelism.

Also another question about the sample sentence:

1)The total money i have is twice that you have.

incorrect -- this "that" is not a relative pronoun such as the one above.

If I wanna say it right, should I say : The total amount of money I have is twice what you have/ how much you have?(which one is right?)

Or, I should rather say as following to bypass the choice between what and how much: I have twice the amount of money(that) you have.

Or: I have twice as much the amount of money as you have(is the "the amount of"here wrong or just redundant).?

Thank you very much!

[RonPurewal]

I just wanna know the right usage of this phrase, could you kindly advise whether it is right if I write: the total amount of pollutant emitted by annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice as much as by all motor vehicles in the Chicago Metro area ?

"by annually by vehicles" is definitely incorrect.

If I wanna say it right, should I say : The total amount of money I have is twice what you have/ how much you have?(which one is right?)

the first of these would probably be marginally acceptable, although it's very weird. (this is the problem with creating your own versions of these things when you don't have a totally firm command of the language -- you may come up with wording that are technically correct but that you would never see in actual, written english.)

"twice how much" is incorrect; it should be twice as much.

Or, I should rather say as following to bypass the choice between what and how much: I have twice the amount of money(that) you have.

that would work.
"twice as much money..." is more compact, but this works too.

Or: I have twice as much the amount of money as you have(is the "the amount of"here wrong or just redundant).?

having both "as much" and "the amount of" is redundant, since those mean the same thing.

[violetwind]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for the explanations! I'm cleared except for the first one.

I just wanna know the right usage of this phrase, could you kindly advise whether it is right if I write: the total amount of pollutant emitted by annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice as much as by all motor vehicles in the Chicago Metro area ?

"by annually by vehicles" is definitely incorrect.

Yea, I feel weird about it too. but it appears in the non-underlined part of this SC problem and no one has mentioned it....

Is it right after I deleted the "by" before "annualy" ? in other words, can I omit the "emitted annually" altogether with "total amount of pollutant" ? can "as much as" connect two "Prep.+ Object" phrase as parallilism ?

the total amount of pollutant emitted annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice as much as by all motor vehicles in the Chicago Metro area ?

[puneet124]

actually, i don't think so. i think the combination of "amount" and "as much as" would be tagged as redundant and therefore wrong.

i am not 100% on this, as the gmat's usage preferences are rather slippery at times, but there's no doubt that this suggestion is inferior to the version without "as much as".

shorter versions:
amount X is twice as much as amount Y --> inferior, and possibly even wrong (redundant)
amount X is twice amount Y --> undoubtedly better

Dear Ron Sir
please clear my below doubt


Wrong
total amount of pollutant emitted by annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice as much annually as is emitted by the motor vehicles. in the Chicago Metro area

Right1 twice as much as is emitted annually by the motor vehicles
Right2 twice as much as is annually emitted by the motor vehicles

which one version of the right one is correct and why

[RonPurewal]

Right1 twice as much as is emitted annually by the motor vehicles
Right2 twice as much as is annually emitted by the motor vehicles

which one version of the right one is correct and why

the first one is right, but word order is not tested on the gmat -- mostly because it is basically impossible for non-native speakers of the language to master.
for instance, in english, "the first five problems" is correct while "the five first problems" is incorrect; in spanish, the reverse is true. there is no logical reason for either of these word orders; they just are what they are.
the gmat may test idiomatic constructions, but it won't test items that are basically impossible for non-native speakers to master. (incidentally, this is the same reason why "a/an/the" is not tested.)

the only case in which the gmat tests word order is in the case of modifier placement, in which you would want to choose the word order that places a modifier as close as possible to its intended antecedent.
for instance, i bought only groceries today implies that i didn't buy anything else today, but leaves open the possibility that i did other things besides shopping; however, i only bought groceries today implies that i didn't do anything else today at all.

no other aspect of word order will be tested.

[plelclaln]

Hi Ron,

Is it right after I deleted the "by" before "annualy" ? in other words, can I omit the "emitted annually" altogether with "total amount of pollutant" ? can "as much as" connect two "Prep.+ Object" phrase as parallilism ?

the total amount of pollutant emitted annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice as much as by all motor vehicles in the Chicago Metro area ?

Hi, Ron.
I would like to know whether the above sentence is correct.
Since in my Gmat prep, there is no "by" before annually by vehicles.

Thanks :)

[RonPurewal]

I would like to know whether the above sentence is correct.
Since in my Gmat prep, there is no "by" before annually by vehicles.

Thanks :)

yes. if the original problem actually said "by annually" -- which i very much doubt -- then that would be very, very wrong. i think it's safe to assume that was just a mistake on the part of whoever transcribed the problem.

[jp.jprasanna]

Hi Ron - really sorry to bother you with so many questions...


The number of people flying first class on domestic flights rose sharply in 1990, doubling the increase of the previous year
Option E twice as many as the increase of -
here twice and increase is redudant right? - Would it be correct to say - twice the increase of the previous year...?

In the above question if we drop all the prep phrases then -
The number rose sharply , twice the increase of the previsous year { here twice refers to number correct - Am i safe in following the same steps in the real exam? }

According to surveys by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, about 20 percent of young adults used cocaine in 1979, doubling those reported in the 1977 survey.
Option A - doubling those reported in the 1977 survey. [ here those is worng right - cant refer to 20% which is singular]
Option E (correct ans) twice the number reported in the 1977 survey

here if the core sentence would be
about 20 % of young adults used cocaine, twice the number reported in the 1977 survey [isnt twice a concrete noun that modifes the noun that preceding it - in this case cocaine- how can twice refer to 20%?

Also general questions about "twice"

1/ Increase by twice - is this wrong?
2/ twice the increase... --> Is this correct?

Can you pls illustrate the usage of 1/ & 2/ pls?

- the number increased by more than twice / two times - Is this wrong because of redudancy i.e twice and increase both are not required correct?
So the correct version can be
3/ According to surveys by the National advertisment counsil, 30000 people were influenced by TV adds in 2002 ; This number inceased in 1998
4/ According to surveys by the National advertisment counsil, 30000 people were influenced by TV adds in 2002 ; twice the number reported in 1998

-increase in 2000 - means 2000 itself increased?
-increase of 2000 - something increase in that year?

Cheers

[jp.jprasanna]

B) as much annually as is emitted by the
All is missing.

no, i wouldn't eliminate for this reason.
even if you just say "...by the motor vehicles in the chicago metro area", the meaning is the same as it would be if you'd included "all". the "all" serves to add emphasis, but doesn't really change the meaning.

the real problem is that "is" has no parallel in the first part of the comparison - i.e., the first part doesn't say "is emitted" or "are emitted" - and so the comparison is wrong.

Ron - Then would the answer be correct if it were
as much annually as emitted by the i.e with out the "is"

Could you please let me know if " as much annually as is emitted by the" were to be right how should the 1st half of the sentence look like- Can you pls show us with some examples.

Is the below correct?

the total amount of pollution that is emitted annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice as much as is emitted annually by the motor vehicles in the Chicago Metro area

[zhongshanlh]

Ron，pls help.
in the previous post in this thread.you said that this sentence was wrong:

6)The number of books i have is twice that you have.
(i have already replaced the wrong word"are")

however, i think that the sentence above is written in the same way as the correct answer of the question asked in this thread, here it is
"the total amount of pollutant emitted annually by vehicles at O’Hare International Airport is twice that emitted annually by all motor vehicles in the Chicago metropolitan area"

so i wonder why you said "The number of books i have is twice that you have" is written in a wrong way?

pls help!thank you so much in advance!

[RonPurewal]

Ron，pls help.
in the previous post in this thread.you said that this sentence was wrong:

6)The number of books i have is twice that you have.
(i have already replaced the wrong word"are")

however, i think that the sentence above is written in the same way as the correct answer of the question asked in this thread, here it is
"the total amount of pollutant emitted annually by vehicles at O’Hare International Airport is twice that emitted annually by all motor vehicles in the Chicago metropolitan area"

so i wonder why you said "The number of books i have is twice that you have" is written in a wrong way?

pls help!thank you so much in advance!

oh, hmm. well, if you read it in that way, then it would be correct.
the problem, though, is that no one (at least no one who is proficient in english) is ever going to read it that way. basically, that kind of construction just doesn't appear in normal english, while the other interpretation (the book that i have, the things that you have, etc.) -- the interpretation that's incorrect in this case -- appears on a very regular basis.

linguists have a name for sentences like this -- "garden path sentence". the idea is that the sentence has a correct interpretation, but that no one who's actually proficient in the language will find that interpretation (at least not without considerable effort).
here's another example:
the horse raced past the barn fell down.
--> this sentence is correct if you read "raced" as a past participle (like the car driven past the barn crashed into the tree) ... but no one is actually going to read it that way. instead, everyone is going to read "the horse raced past the barn" as a complete sentence, with "raced" as a verb, and then get horribly confused when they get to the end of the sentence.

--

needless to say, gmac is never going to test you on any of this kind of stuff.

[lwc1024]

Ron，pls help.
in the previous post in this thread.you said that this sentence was wrong:

6)The number of books i have is twice that you have.
(i have already replaced the wrong word"are")

however, i think that the sentence above is written in the same way as the correct answer of the question asked in this thread, here it is
"the total amount of pollutant emitted annually by vehicles at O’Hare International Airport is twice that emitted annually by all motor vehicles in the Chicago metropolitan area"

so i wonder why you said "The number of books i have is twice that you have" is written in a wrong way?

pls help!thank you so much in advance!

oh, hmm. well, if you read it in that way, then it would be correct.
the problem, though, is that no one (at least no one who is proficient in english) is ever going to read it that way. basically, that kind of construction just doesn't appear in normal english, while the other interpretation (the book that i have, the things that you have, etc.) -- the interpretation that's incorrect in this case -- appears on a very regular basis.

linguists have a name for sentences like this -- "garden path sentence". the idea is that the sentence has a correct interpretation, but that no one who's actually proficient in the language will find that interpretation (at least not without considerable effort).
here's another example:
the horse raced past the barn fell down.
--> this sentence is correct if you read "raced" as a past participle (like the car driven past the barn crashed into the tree) ... but no one is actually going to read it that way. instead, everyone is going to read "the horse raced past the barn" as a complete sentence, with "raced" as a verb, and then get horribly confused when they get to the end of the sentence.

--

needless to say, gmac is never going to test you on any of this kind of stuff.

Hi Ron, could you please explain why the sentence below is wrong if i read it this way:

The number of books i have is twice that you have

Cuz you've noted that the sentence below is correct, rite?

the total amount of pollutant emitted annually by vehicles at the O'hare International airport is twice that emitted annually by all...

Is there any difference?

Thank you very much

[RonPurewal]

The text you've already quoted contains positively everything I have to say about that.
I.e., it's not technically wrong, but (a) no one would ever read the sentence that way naturally, and, more importantly, (b) GMAC would never, ever test this.