Welcome! Check out our free B-School Guides to learn how you compare with other applicants.
Login or Register
 

A Grockit Q (comparison, modifiers ...): doubt about the OA

This topic has 9 expert replies and 17 member replies
Goto page Previous
vikram4689 GMAT Titan
Joined
01 Nov 2009
Posted:
1324 messages
Followed by:
13 members
Thanked:
99 times
Post Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:07 am
lunarpower wrote:
vikram4689 wrote:
In original sentence, from the meaning, we can infer part between commas is just giving additional information. Moreover if we remove part between commas sentence still makes sense.
if that's the intention, then the sentence isn't arranged in a way that makes sense.
the -ing modifier is going to modify the preceding clause regardless, so, if the sentence means what you're saying it means, then the "double the figure..." should be placed directly after what it modifies.
as in
...34,000 dolls, double the figure for xxx, accounting for half of the company's revenue

because the sentence is written the way it's written, the most likely interpretation is the opposite of yours -- i.e., that the sentence works the same way as the "butch" example.

this is the more general rule for nonessential modifiers: they should, if at all possible, be slapped directly onto the thing that they are modifying.
in a sentence with potential ambiguity -- like this one -- they must be placed directly onto the thing they modify, lest the sentence be misinterpreted.
Yeah, construction you stated is more clear but i don't know why most of posters of this question have interpreted last modifier in a way similar to mine. It may be because "twice" is an adverb and everyone thought last modifier to modify dolls sold. For same reason, I think in following grammatically correct sentence "dolls" are modified
Last year Torville Toys sold 34,000 Quizmo Dolls, accounting for almost half of their total revenue, twice as much as in 2005.


I found 2 more instances of such construction. Since, in both of the sentences both of the modifiers are adjectival, both modifier same noun and reversing order of modifiers will not change intended meaning
A survey by the National Council of Churches showed that in 1986 there were 20,736 female ministers, almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy, double the figure for 1977 .

According to the National Science Foundation, in 2003 there were 198,113 female science and engineering graduate students, almost 42% of the graduate students in those fields, double the figure for 1981.
.

_________________
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button Wink

Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!

GMAT/MBA Expert

Post Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:30 am
here is a big part of the problem:

vikram4689 wrote:
I found 2 more instances of such construction.
you know what's missing here that's important, right?
you haven't named the SOURCE of the problems! from what i can tell, you may not even know the source.

remember -- third-party sources are useful for extra practice, but, at the end of the day, the official problems are the only ones that matter.

of the problems you listed, one is official: the one about churches and clergy. (this is OG11 problem #4.)

the others are very clearly based on that one, so they don't add any value to the discussion -- they are just re-using exactly the same principles.
at best, they will repeat the same things you'll learn from the official problem; at worst, they will distort those things.

do you check the sources of problems? if not, you should.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for almost 20 years.

He wears white after Labor Day, gets 55% of his calories from protein, and takes standardized tests for fun.

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron o en inglés o en español.

If you send Ron a private message, please allow 1-2 weeks for a response.

Learn more about ron

Free Manhattan GMAT online events - The first class of every online Manhattan GMAT course is free. Classes start every week.

GMAT/MBA Expert

Post Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:30 am
in the official problem, the last modifier is best taken to modify the stuff directly next to it, for the same reasons i mentioned a couple of posts up.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for almost 20 years.

He wears white after Labor Day, gets 55% of his calories from protein, and takes standardized tests for fun.

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron o en inglés o en español.

If you send Ron a private message, please allow 1-2 weeks for a response.

Learn more about ron

Thanked by: thulsy
Free Manhattan GMAT online events - The first class of every online Manhattan GMAT course is free. Classes start every week.
vikram4689 GMAT Titan
Joined
01 Nov 2009
Posted:
1324 messages
Followed by:
13 members
Thanked:
99 times
Post Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:57 am
These sentences are from Grockit(dolls), OG-11(churches), MGMAT(national science foundation).

Quote:
in the official problem, the last modifier is best taken to modify the stuff directly next to it, for the same reasons i mentioned a couple of posts up
lets consider OG one:
A survey by the National Council of Churches showed that in 1986 there were 20,736 female ministers, almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy, double the figure for 1977

so you are saying that double the figure for 1977 modifies 9 percent of the nation's clergy. Like in earlier case, in this case we don't have -ing modifier(adverbial modifier) instead both the modifier here as adjectival so how to infer double the figure for 1977 modifies 9 percent of the nation's clergy OR 20,736 female ministers

_________________
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button Wink

thulsy Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
Joined
02 Feb 2012
Posted:
42 messages
Followed by:
6 members
Thanked:
6 times
Test Date:
July 2012
GMAT Score:
760
Post Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:52 am
Ron, thank you for your nice explanation. Below is what I get - hopefully I understand your point, please kindly correct me if I am wrong.
(I understand you are not "free" to discuss the OG problem in detail, otherwise GMAC will not tolerate. So hereby I do my own work and your comments are greatly appreciated.)

OG11 #4
A survey by the National Council of Churches showed that in 1986 there were 20,736 female ministers, almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy, double the figure for 1977.

Here we have
Main clause, appositive noun modifier ("almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy"), another noun modifier ("double ...")

(1)appositive noun modifier conveys the idea of "equivalent"
20,736 female ministers = almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy
(2)As Ron explained above, the "double ..." modifier, in general, modifies the stuff next to it.
almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy ~ double the figure for 1977

Now, combine (1) and (2)
20,736 female ministers = almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy ~ double the figure for 1977

Notice that 20,736 is a "figure" and "9 percent" CANNOT be said a "figure". Therefore, the meaning is essentially
20,736 female ministers ~ double the figure for 1977
As per OG explanation: Double the figure for 1977 places the focus on the number and correctly completes the comparison.
In other words, there is no ambiguity in the official sentence.

--
By contrast, in the Grockit question, we have
Main clause, v-ing adverbial modifier ("accounting for half of the company's revenue"), another noun modifier ("double ...")

This sentence is incorrect because, as per Ron's explanation, the modifiers are misplaced. It should be:
...34,000 dolls, double the figure for xxx, accounting for half of the company's revenue

The key distinction between this sentence and the OG11 sentence is:
Here we have v-ing adverbial modifier, not an appositive noun modifier. Since adverbial modifier describes the whole clause, we cannot literally equate the two nouns as we have done for the OG question (20,736 female ministers = almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy)

My conclusion: This Grockit question is badly written and we should focus on OG.

--
A similar MGMAT CAT problem
http://gmatclub.com/forum/according-to-the-national-science-foundation-in-2003-there-51309.html

Correct sentence:
According to the National Science Foundation, in 2003 there were 198,113 female science and engineering graduate students, almost 42% of the graduate students in those fields, double the figure for 1981.

I think this question does a good job in imitating the OG question.

--
Another personal take-home

In my initial attempt to this question, I killed C and D at first glance because I wrongly considered "double" as a verb, thinking that there is a run-on. Now I learn that "double" can be used this way - as a noun modifier (adjective), and it should modify the stuff next to it.

Contrast: sentences in which "double" is a verb

The number of people flying first class on domestic flights rose sharply in 1990, doubling the increase of the previous year.
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/the-number-of-people-flying-first-t5600.html

Here the v-ing modifier should apply to the subject of the preceding clause:
The number of people ... doubled the increase (in the number of people ...) of the previous year.
Analogy:
The baby doubled his weight.
I doubled my work efficiency.

We can see the modifier should be adverbial because:
1. the intended meaning is on the growth (the whole idea of the preceding clause)
2. there is no explicit number or figure in the preceding clause

By contrast, in the question of this discussion (OG11 #4), "double ..." is a noun modifier because:
1. the intended meaning is to compare a noun with another noun
2. there is an explicit figure ("20,736 female ministers")



lunarpower wrote:
in the official problem, the last modifier is best taken to modify the stuff directly next to it, for the same reasons i mentioned a couple of posts up.

GMAT/MBA Expert

Post Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:18 am
MOST IMPORTANT
don't accord too much importance to this problem, as it was removed in the transition from OG11 to OG12
-- and we can see why: it's possible for the modifier to be construed ambiguously.
the fact that this problem was removed from OG11 to OG12 is significant (since about 80% of the problems were conserved): these must have been a reason why the problem was removed. in this case, i think we see the problem: this pesky modifier issue.

--

some comments:

* all three of these sentences are structured more or less identically. the two third-party sentences are both clearly knockoffs of the OG11 sentence, so they work in the same way.

* in each of these three sentences, the preferred interpretation is that "double the figure" modifies the statistic that's directly next to it -- i.e., the percentage.
if "double the figure..." were meant to modify the number, rather than the percentage, the sentence would be turned around in the way that i indicated above.

* a percentage may indeed be a "figure".
a "figure", in this sentence, is just a numerical statistic. a percentage is certainly a numerical statistic, so there is nothing wrong with calling a percentage a "figure".

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for almost 20 years.

He wears white after Labor Day, gets 55% of his calories from protein, and takes standardized tests for fun.

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron o en inglés o en español.

If you send Ron a private message, please allow 1-2 weeks for a response.

Learn more about ron

Thanked by: thulsy
Free Manhattan GMAT online events - The first class of every online Manhattan GMAT course is free. Classes start every week.
thulsy Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
Joined
02 Feb 2012
Posted:
42 messages
Followed by:
6 members
Thanked:
6 times
Test Date:
July 2012
GMAT Score:
760
Post Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:47 am
Thank you sooo much, Ron! Now I'm clear, finally Smile
You are the all-mighty!

Particularly thanks for your advice. Well, I notice MGMAT has analysis on the shift from OG11 to OG12
http://www.manhattangmat.com/og12-sentence-corr.cfm
showing that comparison was significantly de-emphasized whereas modifier was significantly emphasized, consistent with your comments here about the removal of this question, which had been designed to test on comparison but turned out, unfortunately, to have modifier ambiguity issue.

GMAT/MBA Expert

Post Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:51 am
thulsy wrote:
Thank you sooo much, Ron! Now I'm clear, finally :)
You are the all-mighty!
oh boy.


Quote:
Particularly thanks for your advice. Well, I notice MGMAT has analysis on the shift from OG11 to OG12
http://www.manhattangmat.com/og12-sentence-corr.cfm
showing that comparison was significantly de-emphasized whereas modifier was significantly emphasized, consistent with your comments here about the removal of this question, which had been designed to test on comparison but turned out, unfortunately, to have modifier ambiguity issue.
they didn't remove the question to de-emphasize comparisons; they took it out because it just isn't as well-written as most of the others (as discussed ad infinitum on this thread).
the comparison part is just fine, and is in fact a valuable exercise; it was just destroyed as collateral damage when the question was taken out of the book.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for almost 20 years.

He wears white after Labor Day, gets 55% of his calories from protein, and takes standardized tests for fun.

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron o en inglés o en español.

If you send Ron a private message, please allow 1-2 weeks for a response.

Learn more about ron

Thanked by: thulsy
Free Manhattan GMAT online events - The first class of every online Manhattan GMAT course is free. Classes start every week.
thulsy Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
Joined
02 Feb 2012
Posted:
42 messages
Followed by:
6 members
Thanked:
6 times
Test Date:
July 2012
GMAT Score:
760
Post Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:49 pm
lunarpower wrote:
Quote:
Particularly thanks for your advice. Well, I notice MGMAT has analysis on the shift from OG11 to OG12
http://www.manhattangmat.com/og12-sentence-corr.cfm
showing that comparison was significantly de-emphasized whereas modifier was significantly emphasized, consistent with your comments here about the removal of this question, which had been designed to test on comparison but turned out, unfortunately, to have modifier ambiguity issue.
they didn't remove the question to de-emphasize comparisons; they took it out because it just isn't as well-written as most of the others (as discussed ad infinitum on this thread).
the comparison part is just fine, and is in fact a valuable exercise; it was just destroyed as collateral damage when the question was taken out of the book.
Oh I get it. So I mistook the statistical coincidence (this question just happened to be comparison-focused) for logical causality ^0^
Yeah, I've learnt a lot from it - thanks to you, Ron. You really rock!!!
Also thanks you guys for your participation. Smile

thulsy Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
Joined
02 Feb 2012
Posted:
42 messages
Followed by:
6 members
Thanked:
6 times
Test Date:
July 2012
GMAT Score:
760
Post Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:08 pm
I just find a similar problem analyzed by Stacey:
http://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/03/08/breaking-down-a-long-gmatprep-sc-problem

The correct sentence is:
More than 300 rivers drain into Siberia’s Lake Baikal, which holds 20 percent of the world’s fresh water, more than all the North American Great Lakes combined.

"more than ..." modifies the statistic directly next to it.
In this question, the structure "double the figure ..." has similar usage.

ronnie1985 GMAT Destroyer!
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posted:
626 messages
Followed by:
9 members
Thanked:
29 times
Test Date:
June
Target GMAT Score:
750
Post Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:32 am
IMO (D)

_________________
Follow your passion, Success as perceived by others shall follow you

GMAT/MBA Expert

Post Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:40 am
thulsy wrote:
I just find a similar problem analyzed by Stacey:
http://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/03/08/breaking-down-a-long-gmatprep-sc-problem

The correct sentence is:
More than 300 rivers drain into Siberia’s Lake Baikal, which holds 20 percent of the world’s fresh water, more than all the North American Great Lakes combined.

"more than ..." modifies the statistic directly next to it.
In this question, the structure "double the figure ..." has similar usage.
good find.

more generally, this should be the default understanding of modifiers in the first place -- they describe things that are close to them.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for almost 20 years.

He wears white after Labor Day, gets 55% of his calories from protein, and takes standardized tests for fun.

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron o en inglés o en español.

If you send Ron a private message, please allow 1-2 weeks for a response.

Learn more about ron

Free Manhattan GMAT online events - The first class of every online Manhattan GMAT course is free. Classes start every week.

Best Conversation Starters

1 varun289 43 topics
2 greenwich 30 topics
3 sana.noor 21 topics
4 guerrero 20 topics
5 killerdrummer 19 topics
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

Most Active Experts

1 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

202 posts
2 image description GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

143 posts
3 image description Anju@Gurome

Gurome

134 posts
4 image description Jim@StratusPrep

Stratus Prep

86 posts
5 image description David@VeritasPrep

Veritas Prep

41 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts