Sentence Correction

In addition to having more protein -than wheat does, the protein in rice is higher quality than that in wheat, with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.

(A) the protein in rice is higher quality than that in
(B) rice has protein of higher quality than that in
(C) the protein in rice is higher in quality than it is in
(D) rice protein is higher in quality than it is in
(E) rice has a protein higher in quality than


my doubt: please tell me as why E is wrong. i feel that that in E the ellipses is taking care of the comparison as follow: rice has a protein higher in quality than wheat [has protein of high quality]

aditya8062 wrote:In addition to having more protein -than wheat does, the protein in rice is higher quality than that in wheat, with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.

(A) the protein in rice is higher quality than that in
(B) rice has protein of higher quality than that in
(C) the protein in rice is higher in quality than it is in
(D) rice protein is higher in quality than it is in
(E) rice has a protein higher in quality than


my doubt: please tell me as why E is wrong. i feel that that in E the ellipses is taking care of the comparison as follow: rice has a protein higher in quality than wheat [has protein of high quality]

The way the sentence using choice E reads it could mean that the protein has more quality than it does wheat, or it could mean that that the protein in rice is higher in quality than wheat is. In the latter case the protein in rice is being compared to wheat, rather than to the protein in wheat. While I guess one could, somehow, interpret the sentence in the way you suggest, an awkward sentence with three possible meanings, two of them nonsensical, is not, we hope, going to be the right answer on the GMAT, especially if a much clearer version can be created using one of the other choices.

aditya8062 wrote:In addition to having more protein -than wheat does, the protein in rice is higher quality than that in wheat, with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.

(A) the protein in rice is higher quality than that in
(B) rice has protein of higher quality than that in
(C) the protein in rice is higher in quality than it is in
(D) rice protein is higher in quality than it is in
(E) rice has a protein higher in quality than


my doubt: please tell me as why E is wrong. i feel that that in E the ellipses is taking care of the comparison as follow: rice has a protein higher in quality than wheat [has protein of high quality]

I received a PM about this SC.

If a comparison allows for more than one reasonable interpretation, eliminate the answer choice.
E can be interpreted as follows:
Rice has a protein [that is] higher in quality than wheat [is high in quality].
Rice has a protein higher in quality than wheat [has a protein high in quality].
Since both of these interpretations are reasonable -- and an alternate choice offers a comparison that CANNOT be misinterpreted -- eliminate E.

Another problem:
Generally, a COMMA + with modifier serves to modify the nearest preceding clause.
Your interpretation of E:
Rice has a protein higher in quality than wheat [has a protein high in quality], with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.
Here, with more of the amino acids seems to be modifying the implied clause in red -- the nearest preceding clause - implying that WHEAT has a protein with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.
The intended meaning is that RICE has a protein with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.

One more issue:
E: protein higher in quality
Here, higher serves to modify protein, implying that the PROTEIN itself is higher.
The intended meaning is that the QUALITY of the protein is higher.
This meaning is more accurately conveyed by the wording in the OA:
protein of HIGHER QUALITY.

Thanks Guru for your reply

E can be interpreted as follows:
Rice has a protein [that is] higher in quality than wheat [is high in quality].
Rice has a protein higher in quality than wheat [has a protein high in quality].

Guru is this ambiguity which you have told similar to the one in the following sentence: a leopard cannot catch a wild beast as fast as a chetah
i somehow get a feeling that such ambiguity in meaning easily pervades in sentences such as "leopard one" as all the THREE elements "leopard" ,"wild beast" and "chetah" are comparable in terms of being similar. when i was trying to apply this same ambiguity to the sentence at hand then some where i feel that even though "rice" and "wheat" are comparable, but "wheat" and "protein" are not .i mean can "rice" ever have "wheat" high in quality?

Another problem:
Generally, a COMMA + with modifier serves to modify the nearest preceding clause.
Your interpretation of E:
Rice has a protein higher in quality than wheat [has a protein high in quality], with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.
Here, with more of the amino acids seems to be modifying the implied clause in red -- the nearest preceding clause - implying that WHEAT has a protein with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.
The intended meaning is that RICE has a protein with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.

this is insightful . but guru please tell me if i apply this reasoning on the OA then will i not get the following interpretation: rice has protein[THAT IS] of higher quality than that [PROTEIN] in wheat [IS OF HIGH QUALITY],+ with clause .
NOW the "WITH clause" will modify the nearest clause : [PROTEIN] in wheat [IS OF HIGH QUALITY],

One more issue:
E: protein higher in quality
Here, higher serves to modify protein, implying that the PROTEIN itself is higher.
The intended meaning is that the QUALITY of the protein is higher.
This meaning is more accurately conveyed by the wording in the OA:
protein of HIGHER QUALITY.

thanks for this nugget !!

thanks and regards

aditya8062 wrote:
Guru is this ambiguity which you have told similar to the one in the following sentence: a leopard cannot catch a wild beast as fast as a chetah
i somehow get a feeling that such ambiguity in meaning easily pervades in sentences such as "leopard one" as all the THREE elements "leopard" ,"wild beast" and "chetah" are comparable in terms of being similar. when i was trying to apply this same ambiguity to the sentence at hand then some where i feel that even though "rice" and "wheat" are comparable, but "wheat" and "protein" are not .i mean can "rice" ever have "wheat" high in quality?

E: protein higher in quality than wheat
Just as PROTEIN can be of high quality, so can WHEAT be of high quality.
As a result, a reader might construe that E is comparing the QUALITY OF THE PROTEIN in rice to the QUALITY OF WHEAT.

Another problem:
Generally, a COMMA + with modifier serves to modify the nearest preceding clause.
Your interpretation of E:
Rice has a protein higher in quality than wheat [has a protein high in quality], with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.
Here, with more of the amino acids seems to be modifying the implied clause in red -- the nearest preceding clause - implying that WHEAT has a protein with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.
The intended meaning is that RICE has a protein with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.

this is insightful . but guru please tell me if i apply this reasoning on the OA then will i not get the following interpretation: rice has protein[THAT IS] of higher quality than that [PROTEIN] in wheat [IS OF HIGH QUALITY],+ with clause .
NOW the "WITH clause" will modify the nearest clause : [PROTEIN] in wheat [IS OF HIGH QUALITY],

Your interpretation of E:
RICE HAS a protein higher in quality than WHEAT HAS a protein of high quality, with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.
In your interpretation, one SUBJECT (rice) is compared to ANOTHER SUBJECT (wheat).
This interpretation is valid only if wheat is given its own verb (has).
Since COMMA + with generally serves to modify the nearest preceding action, the with-modifier in your interpretation seems to refer to the protein that WHEAT HAS:
WHEAT HAS a protein...WITH MORE OF THE AMINO ACIDS ESSENTIAL TO THE HUMAN DIET.
Not the intended meaning.

OA: RICE HAS a protein of higher quality than that in wheat, with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet.
Here, neither protein nor that in wheat is given a verb.
Since the only clause on hand is rice has -- and COMMA + with serves to modify the nearest preceding action -- the with-modifier in the OA clearly refers to the protein that RICE HAS:
RICE HAS a protein...WITH MORE OF THE AMINO ACIDS ESSENTIAL TO THE HUMAN DIET.