Meaning

[BN89]

Hi,

I have a question in regards to one of the questions in the official review. It's question number 89 in the 12th edition.

"Dirt roads may evoke the bucolic simplicity of another century, but financially strained townships point out that dirt roads cost twice as much as maintaining paved roads.

A)
B) dirt roads cost twice as much to maintain as paved roads do

I selected A as the correct answer, but it's B.

I have been studying with the Manhattan books and one of the most important principles taught in the sentence correction book, is that you have to look out for answer choices that might change the meaning of the original sentence.
Now in this question, B actually does change the meaning of the original sentence, doesn't it?
It is said that dirt roads cost twice as much as the maintainance of paved roads. The cost of dirt roads could possibly be the construction of them or it could also be the maintainance of them, but it doesn't have to be. The explanation for B as the correct answer is that the sentence tries to compare the costs necessary to maintain the two roads, but how are we supposed to notice such an underlying intention, which isn't explicitly stated?

[navami]

B does not change meaning here.
moreover "as much as maintaining paved roads" in A is wrong as ur comparing cost with roads...

[dhonu121]

Hi,

I have a question in regards to one of the questions in the official review. It's question number 89 in the 12th edition.

"Dirt roads may evoke the bucolic simplicity of another century, but financially strained townships point out that dirt roads cost twice as much as maintaining paved roads.

A)
B) dirt roads cost twice as much to maintain as paved roads do

I selected A as the correct answer, but it's B.

I have been studying with the Manhattan books and one of the most important principles taught in the sentence correction book, is that you have to look out for answer choices that might change the meaning of the original sentence.
Now in this question, B actually does change the meaning of the original sentence, doesn't it?
It is said that dirt roads cost twice as much as the maintainance of paved roads. The cost of dirt roads could possibly be the construction of them or it could also be the maintainance of them, but it doesn't have to be. The explanation for B as the correct answer is that the sentence tries to compare the costs necessary to maintain the two roads, but how are we supposed to notice such an underlying intention, which isn't explicitly stated?

Your point is duly justified, but in that case, the original sentence should have ended with a do to make a sense of comparison as per what you are saying.
Don't you think so ?

[Jim@Grockit]

The GMAT values clarity and meaning. If they truly meant to compare the cost of dirt roads (their construction, perhaps) to the cost of maintaining paved roads, the correct answer would have made that clearer. In terms of noticing the underlying intention -- which I think was your original question -- one of the things you should be asking yourself, particularly in comparisons, is Is the underlying intention clear?; if it is not, narrow your answer choices down to things that clarify the intention, and then work on finding one with the correct grammar and best style/concision.

[BN89]

Ok I get why B is correct now, it just wasn't as obvious as most of the answer explanations, thanks guys.

[Brian@VeritasPrep]

Hey, let me just add to this with a note about meaning, since I know that's a topic of concern around here these days.

It is NOT your job to match the meaning of the initial sentence. There's nothing magical or "incumbent" about choice A. Your job is to eliminate illogical meanings. And choice A may very well be illogical.

In this example, A is, indeed, illogical:

Dirt roads (themselves...just the roads...not the maintenance) cost twice as much as maintaining paved roads (the maintenance).

That's not a valid comparison. Are we comparing the construction of dirt roads (but no maintenance costs) to the maintenance of other roads? And if so, is that really an apt comparison? Shouldn't we know the cost of constructing the paved roads, then?


What worries me the most is that idea that your job is to eliminate choices that change the meaning of the original. If the original is incorrect because of an illogical meaning, you have to change it. So know that - there's nothing in the rules that says "preserve the meaning". Your job is to have a grammatically-and-logically correct sentence, regardless of the letter in front of it.