Female grad students (quantity expressions)

[Osirus@VeritasPrep]

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

OA in a bit

[thephoenix]

IMO E
A) much is noncountable + no's are compared with 1981
b) no's are compared with 1981
c) figure for 1981 is incorrect
d)modifying issue
E)correct

[mmon]

IMO C
A much is used for uncountable noun ...>incorrect
B though many is used but the comparison is not clear...>incorrect
C precise and compares it properly
D "it" is ambiguous.
E wordy

[Osirus@VeritasPrep]

OA is C..

Why is the comparison unclear in B?

[mmslf75]

OA is C..

Why is the comparison unclear in B?

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.




B is wrong since .. Twice as Many as 1981 implies as though u are comparing STUDENTS with 1981
This construction thus is non-sensical

[Osirus@VeritasPrep]

Ah, I see it now. Thanks.

[becnil]

Thanks mmslf75..I am also for C

[hk_4u]

Ron/Stuart - Please clarify

What all is wrong in option E

a number double that of 1981's

I feel

a number - correct - noun can be repeated

that - initially I thought that that does not have a referent ,but I think it refers to a number

of 1981's - I feel this is the main culprit

so will the ans choice below be correct

a number double that of 1981

[Stuart@KaplanGMAT]

Ron/Stuart - Please clarify

What all is wrong in option E

a number double that of 1981's

I feel

a number - correct - noun can be repeated

that - initially I thought that that does not have a referent ,but I think it refers to a number

of 1981's - I feel this is the main culprit

so will the ans choice below be correct

a number double that of 1981

Correct - the problem is "that of 1981's".

"that of" negates the need for the possessive. Either "double 1981's" or "double that of 1981" would be correct.

[nipunkathuria]

Ron/Stuart - Please clarify

What all is wrong in option E

a number double that of 1981's

I feel

a number - correct - noun can be repeated

that - initially I thought that that does not have a referent ,but I think it refers to a number

of 1981's - I feel this is the main culprit

so will the ans choice below be correct

a number double that of 1981

Correct - the problem is "that of 1981's".

"that of" negates the need for the possessive. Either "double 1981's" or "double that of 1981" would be correct.

Thanks Stuart...it really helped

[CaptainM]

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

Please help me understand how is "in 2003" parallel to "for 1981"

[crick]

+1 for C.

The parallelism is in the actual number..
2003 figure = 198,113.
1981 figure = half of 2003.

Crick

[navami]

IMO D

[aspirant2011]

I am confused with option C i.e with the usage of for 1981.........experts please comment