BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

National Science Foundation

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:07 am
Thanked: 4 times
GMAT Score:690

National Science Foundation

by vaibhav.iit2002 » Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:05 pm
2. 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, twice as much as 1981.
a. twice as much as 1981
b. twice as many as 1981
c. double the figure for 1981
d. double what it was in 1981
e. a number double that of 1981's


--------

In explanation, its given that e is incorrect as "that" has no clear antecedent, but we write sentences as,
I have a bigger dog than that of you.

I don't think we have any problem with this sentence. Experts, Plz clarify.
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:40 am
Thanked: 28 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:700

by sunnyjohn » Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:02 am
that of 1981 can be correct
but that of 1981's

'of' is already included in 1981's.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:07 am
Thanked: 4 times
GMAT Score:690

by vaibhav.iit2002 » Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:44 am
sunnyjohn wrote:that of 1981 can be correct
but that of 1981's

'of' is already included in 1981's.
I agree that E is wrong. I am concerned about the explanation that says ' "that" has no clear antecedent '.
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

Re: National Science Foundation

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:55 am
vaibhav.iit2002 wrote:2. 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, twice as much as 1981.
a. twice as much as 1981
b. twice as many as 1981
c. double the figure for 1981
d. double what it was in 1981
e. a number double that of 1981's


--------

In explanation, its given that e is incorrect as "that" has no clear antecedent, but we write sentences as,
I have a bigger dog than that of you.

I don't think we have any problem with this sentence. Experts, Plz clarify.
"That" in E can definitely refer to "a number"; however it's missing "than" (which you include in your counter-example) and "1981's" is also confusing in the sentence.

What's the source? Whenever you're questioning an explanation, providing the source makes it easier to judge its accuracy.
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:07 am
Thanked: 4 times
GMAT Score:690

Re: National Science Foundation

by vaibhav.iit2002 » Wed Oct 07, 2009 5:38 am
Stuart Kovinsky wrote:
"That" in E can definitely refer to "a number"; however it's missing "than" (which you include in your counter-example) and "1981's" is also confusing in the sentence.

What's the source? Whenever you're questioning an explanation, providing the source makes it easier to judge its accuracy.
I agree we should mention source in such cases. Source is MGMAT CAT3.

Thanks a lot Stuart.
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1