modification question (experts)

Expert replies

voodoo_child: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 405; Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:44 amFollowed by: 1 member; Thanked: 3 times

by voodoo_child » Wed Jul 13, 2011 1:53 pm

A survey by the National Council of Churches showed that in 1986 there were 20,376 female ministers, almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy, twice as much as 1977.
(A) twice as much as 1977
(B) twice as many as 1977
(C) double what it was in 1977
(D) double the figure for 1977
(E) a number double that of 1977's

I arrived at D by guessing that "twice as..." modifies the number of female ministers. However, why is that "twice as " is not modifying the appositive "almost 9 % of..."?

Thanks

Like this post

Source: Beat The GMAT — Sentence Correction | Wed Jul 13, 2011 1:53 pm

GMATGuruNY: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 15539; Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pmFollowed by: 1906 members; Location: New York, NY; Thanked: 13060 times; GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Wed Jul 13, 2011 2:11 pm

voodoo_child wrote:A survey by the National Council of Churches showed that in 1986 there were 20,376 female ministers, almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy, twice as much as 1977.
(A) twice as much as 1977
(B) twice as many as 1977
(C) double what it was in 1977
(D) double the figure for 1977
(E) a number double that of 1977's

I arrived at D by guessing that "twice as..." modifies the number of female ministers. However, why is that "twice as " is not modifying the appositive "almost 9 % of..."?

Thanks

In A and B, 9% (a percentage) is incorrectly compared to 1977 (a year). Eliminate A and B.

In E, of 1977's is an error of redundancy. It's sufficient to say of 1977; the possessive construction is unnecessary.

In C, it has no clear antecedent. (If it refers to 9%, then the sentence is saying in 1986...9% [was] double what 9% was in 1977, which makes no sense.) Eliminate C.

The correct answer is D.

Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

Like this post

voodoo_child: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 405; Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:44 amFollowed by: 1 member; Thanked: 3 times

by voodoo_child » Wed Jul 13, 2011 2:49 pm

GMATGuruNY wrote:
voodoo_child wrote:A survey by the National Council of Churches showed that in 1986 there were 20,376 female ministers, almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy, twice as much as 1977.
(A) twice as much as 1977
(B) twice as many as 1977
(C) double what it was in 1977
(D) double the figure for 1977
(E) a number double that of 1977's

I arrived at D by guessing that "twice as..." modifies the number of female ministers. However, why is that "twice as " is not modifying the appositive "almost 9 % of..."?

Thanks
In A and B, 9% (a percentage) is incorrectly compared to 1977 (a year). Eliminate A and B.

In E, of 1977's is an error of redundancy. It's sufficient to say of 1977; the possessive construction is unnecessary.

In C, it has no clear antecedent. (If it refers to 9%, then the sentence is saying in 1986...9% [was] double what 9% was in 1977, which makes no sense.) Eliminate C.

The correct answer is D.

thanks Mitch for your response. I really appreciate your help.

OG says that "twice as much as 1977" refers to "the number of ministers". I am not sure about the grammatical rule when we have an appositive between two comparisons. e.g.

the number of apples, almost 9% of country's total fruit production, more than that of oranges, in the basket are red. I have tried to come up with an example. I am not sure whether it makes sense. Can you please help me / correct the example if it's wrong ?

Thanks

Like this post

amit2k9: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 461; Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 9:09 amFollowed by: 3 members; Location: pune; Thanked: 36 times

by amit2k9 » Wed Jul 13, 2011 8:03 pm

voodoo_child wrote:A survey by the National Council of Churches showed that in 1986 there were 20,376 female ministers, almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy, twice as much as 1977.
(A) twice as much as 1977 -- verb 'in' or 'for' needed. POE
(B) twice as many as 1977 --many is not correct usage. POE
(C) double what it was in 1977 -- double of required. POE.
(D) double the figure for 1977 --proper usage.
(E) a number double that of 1977's -- wordy.

I arrived at D by guessing that "twice as..." modifies the number of female ministers. However, why is that "twice as " is not modifying the appositive "almost 9 % of..."?

percentage cannot be direct multiplication.It can be either an increase or a decrease.

Thanks

For Understanding Sustainability,Green Businesses and Social Entrepreneurship visit -https://aamthoughts.blocked/
(Featured Best Green Site Worldwide-https://bloggers.com/green/popular/page2)

Like this post

mundasingh123: Legendary Member; Posts: 2330; Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 amFollowed by: 26 members; Thanked: 56 times

by mundasingh123 » Thu Jul 14, 2011 4:16 am

GMATGuruNY wrote:
voodoo_child wrote:A survey by the National Council of Churches showed that in 1986 there were 20,376 female ministers, almost 9 percent of the nation's clergy, twice as much as 1977.
(A) twice as much as 1977
(B) twice as many as 1977
(C) double what it was in 1977
(D) double the figure for 1977
(E) a number double that of 1977's

I arrived at D by guessing that "twice as..." modifies the number of female ministers. However, why is that "twice as " is not modifying the appositive "almost 9 % of..."?

Thanks
In A and B, 9% (a percentage) is incorrectly compared to 1977 (a year). Eliminate A and B.

In E, of 1977's is an error of redundancy. It's sufficient to say of 1977; the possessive construction is unnecessary.

In C, it has no clear antecedent. (If it refers to 9%, then the sentence is saying in 1986...9% [was] double what 9% was in 1977, which makes no sense.) Eliminate C.

The correct answer is D.

Hi GmatGuruNY , in E isnt (a number ...) an appositive and doesnt it require a noun to modify . The only noun in its vicinity is "20,376 female ministers" and 20376 ministaers are not a number

I Seek Explanations Not Answers

Like this post

Post new topic Locked

• Page 1 of 1

GMAT Course Reviews

559 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (560 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review