Sentence Correction

Can somebody come and breakdown these question informally?

1) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic.

A) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
B) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of it away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
C) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
D) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of it away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
E) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of it away, metal tableware has begun to be supplied recently instead of plastic at Bob's Java Hut
OA: D

Hint from Grockit: "Tableware" is a mass noun and will pair with singular verbs and pronouns, making "too many of them" incorrect.

2) Data published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that in 1995 there were 113,100 women incarcerated in US prisons, over seven percent of the prison population in the US, three times as much as 1985.

A) three times as much as 1985
B) three times as many as 1985
C) triple what it was in 1985
D) triple the population in 1985
E) a population triple that of 1985's
OA: D
Hint from Grockit: "Much" and "many" are commonly confused words. "Many" should be used alongside finite, or countable, items; "much," on the other hand, should be used with unquantifiable sets (the same is true of "number" and "amount," respectively).

Jim, Nazar7ft, gmat_perfect, SaraiGMAX can explain these for me?

Good questions. I think experts will explain the concepts.

Thanks.

2) Data published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that in 1995 there were 113,100 women incarcerated in US prisons, over seven percent of the prison population in the US, three times as much as 1985.

A) three times as much as 1985

As much as is not correct because "prison population" is countable.

B) three times as many as 1985

People have been compared with the year 1985.

C) triple what it was in 1985

What = something that. So, the use of what is redundant.

D) triple the population in 1985
-> Correct.

E) a population triple that of 1985's
--> Problem of double possessive.

amir_hatef wrote:Can somebody come and breakdown these question informally?

1) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic.

A) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
B) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of it away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
C) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
D) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of it away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
E) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of it away, metal tableware has begun to be supplied recently instead of plastic at Bob's Java Hut
OA: D

Hint from Grockit: "Tableware" is a mass noun and will pair with singular verbs and pronouns, making "too many of them" incorrect.

2) Data published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that in 1995 there were 113,100 women incarcerated in US prisons, over seven percent of the prison population in the US, three times as much as 1985.

A) three times as much as 1985
B) three times as many as 1985
C) triple what it was in 1985
D) triple the population in 1985
E) a population triple that of 1985's
OA: D
Hint from Grockit: "Much" and "many" are commonly confused words. "Many" should be used alongside finite, or countable, items; "much," on the other hand, should be used with unquantifiable sets (the same is true of "number" and "amount," respectively).

Jim, Nazar7ft, gmat_perfect, SaraiGMAX can explain these for me?

it'd be adorable of you if you spoiled the answer.
1. Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic[/u].

A) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
B) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of it away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
C) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
D) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of it away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic ( plastic here is uncountable noun)
E) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of it away, metal tableware has begun to be supplied recently instead of plastic at Bob's Java Hut ( wordy)

I don't see any of the options as great. If D is the correct answer choice, the sentence would read:

Data published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that in 1995 there were 113,100 women incarcerated in US prisons, over seven percent of the prison population in the US, triple the population in 1985.

So, what does triple the population refer to? women population (who were incarcerated) or prison Population? Since prison population is already mentioned in the sentence, grammatically I would think triple the population should refer to triple the prison population, but logically (in the context of this sentence), this should refer to population of women.

Could someone from the source company point to an official question that this question is modeled after?

1) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic.

A) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
B) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too many of it away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
C) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of them away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
D) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of it away, Bob's Java Hut recently began supplying metal tableware instead of plastic
E) Hoping the customers would not carelessly throw too much of it away, metal tableware has begun to be supplied recently instead of plastic at Bob's Java Hut
OA: D

Hint from Grockit: "Tableware" is a mass noun and will pair with singular verbs and pronouns, making "too many of them" incorrect.

Can some experts comment on this ???? it would be a favour

tahnsk in advance

The first question:

In A, them does not refer to anything (unless illogically referring back to customers which would be grammatically incorrect and weird!). The question attempts to trick the student into think tableware is plural.

Answer B: 'Many' cannot agree with 'it' which refers to plastic (tableware)

Answer C: 'too much' cannot agree with the plural them, as explained by others.

Answer D: Although not a great correct answer because the sentence just ends with plastic when in comparison questions there should be a full comparison (metal tableware instead of plastic tableware or metal tableware instead of its plastic equivalent...) which makes it seem as if metal tableware is being compared with just plastic, it is still the best answer choice. 'Much' is paired with 'it' which stands in for the 'mass' singular noun tableware.

Answer E: Apart from being wordy, needlessly changing the tense, needlessly using the Passive (stylistic error!), and an awkward sentence construction, there is the large issue of a Modifier mistake: The modifying phrase 'Hoping...' cannot modify metal tableware. It is the store that is hoping not the tableware. So E is wrong on about 4 or 5 counts (You do not usually have more than 2 errors per choice in the GMAT - sometimes 3 when they like to throw in a sprinkle of redundancy or other stylistic errors too).

Forgot about the second question:

'Three times' is usually considered redundant in the GMAT. Triple is preferable (same with two times and four times which, if possible, should be changed to double/twice and quadruple, respectively).

Also, in C, the 'it' is ambiguous and redundant, while D makes it clearer that it is the population that is being referred to. Perhaps the reason why it is clear it is the 'women' that is being referred to is that after the word 'prisons' we get two modifying phrases and these both act as adjectives and both referring back to the woman.

For example, He is now a happy person, relieved of his responsibilities, free as a bird. Although this is a bit too literary, it mimics the literary style of the question above (normally you would see the conjunction' and' between the two phrases.

Another reason to eliminate A and B and keep D is the comparison aspect, as is explained earlier in the thread: The population cannot be compared with the year- you need the preposition 'in' to compare the population in both years. GMAT loves this type of missing-preposition comparison.

Hi Issac, would be curious to know whose population do you think the population in choice D refers to and why?

Again, I am not crazy about the question, but it would seem that the 'women' or female population the target reference.

In my first response I explained that I thought this is because what comes after the word 'prisons' is a list of two modifying phrases referring back to the 'women' who are incarcerated.

However, looking at this again, there is a further reason: the comparison is between the years: 1985 and 1995. 1995 refers to the 'women'; 1985 too should refer back to the women as this is the comparison that is being attempted, especially as it presented in phrasal form (triple the population in 1985). Also, the 'triple' or quantitative aspect is an additional piece of information to the 7% which itself refers to the female prison population (the incarcerated women).

Hi Issac, I doubt that this unambiguously refers to 'women population' (though this is the 'intended' reference). For one thing, only 'prison population' is mentioned in the sentence and not 'women population'. In ellipsis, we are (in general) only allowed to make assumptions about exact words and sequences.

Also, with option D, the sentence can be interpreted as:

In 1995 there were 113,100 women incarcerated in US prisons, a figure that amounts to:

1. over seven percent of the (total) prison population in the US, AND

2. triple the (total prison) population in 1985.

Again, both modifiers modify women, the comparison is still between times, but as you can see, the meaning is completely changed.

As I have said, not a great question here.

However population is mentioned in the form not only of 'prison population' but previously too, and quite explicitly as 'women incarcerated' and the comparison is not between the two modifying phrases. I agree with you that A) the 113,000 women amounts to 7% of the total prison population but the second phrase also refers back to the number of women incarcerated again because of the comparison of years, and B) [most importantly here so we can close this off] this is not a great question by any means.

Although I am not sure what question this comes from in official material, I will do my own search back to see if we can find an equivalent and let you know. Unfortunately in the GMAT some ambiguities are left as such and are even justified by the test writers as being the best answer if all other answers are grammatically wrong.

Here is hoping to less ambiguity.

Sure Issac. Appreciate your response.

Do let us know if you find something else along these lines.