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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions
Start free 5-day trial
Read 559 reviewsTarget Test Prep

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

modification question (experts)

Expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
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
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
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
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
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
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
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)
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
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
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1