Traffic safety

[Dean Jones]

Dear Friends,

I was having problems in answering the following question.

Traffic safety officials predict that drivers will be equally likely to exceed the
proposed speed limit as the current one.

A. equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as
B. equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are
C. equally likely that they will exceed the proposed speed limit as
D. as likely that they will exceed the proposed speed limit as
E. as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are


Please help.

OA after some discussions.

My choice was option B.

Regards
Deano.

[HSPA]

I am with A

B is having wrong comparision: drivers = present safty rules

to make B correct : will exceed the new speed limit as they are 'exceeding' the current one.

[Dean Jones]

OA is option ECan anyone explain why option B is incorrect.

[hoji]

B is incorrect, because it use "equally... as..." to compare, but this is unidiomatic, the correct idiom is "as ... as"

Example: i am equally strong as you- incorrect;
i am as strong as you - correct.

Meanwhile, "equal, equally" are used for numbers, or numerical issues;

[amit2k9]

correct idiom is as ..likely ..as.

comparison is between drivers breaking the proposed limit and the drivers breaking the old limit.
so between B and E,E uses the correct idiom and comparison.

[GmatKiss]

Is the OA: E, it seems ambiguous for me!

[patanjali.purpose]

Traffic safety officials predict that drivers will be equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as the current one.
A. equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as
B. equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are
C. equally likely that they will exceed the proposed speed limit as
D. as likely that they will exceed the proposed speed limit as
E. as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are

Intended meaning is to compare likelihood of drivers' Exceeding of PROPOSED speed limit and Likelihood of same set of driver' Exceeding of existing speed limit

Note in original sentence, ONE is a pronoun and refers to SPEED LIMIT.

Therefore, A/C/D comparison is between likelihood of drivers' Exceeding of PROPOSED speed limit and JUST existing speed limit. Its logically inappropriate to comapre likelihood with speed limit.

B/E - we have problem in B with idiom (in fact we can drop all choice except B & E just based on idiom 'AS...AS').Moreover, THEY in E refers to DRIVERS (part of same clause)

[GMATGuruNY]

Dear Friends,

I was having problems in answering the following question.

Traffic safety officials predict that drivers will be equally likely to exceed the
proposed speed limit as the current one.

A. equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as
B. equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are
C. equally likely that they will exceed the proposed speed limit as
D. as likely that they will exceed the proposed speed limit as
E. as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are

Please help.

OA after some discussions.

My choice was option B.

Regards
Deano.

In A, B and C, equally...as is unidiomatic.

Correct: X and Y are equally qualified.
Correct: X is as qualified as Y.
Incorrect: X is equally qualified as Y.

Eliminate A, B and C.

In D, drivers will be AS likely THAT is unidiomatic. The required idiom here is drivers will be AS likely TO. Eliminate D.

The correct answer is E.

E employs ellipsis: the omission of words whose presence is understood.
In E:

One = speed limit.
They = drivers.
The phrase likely to exceed is omitted, but its presence is understood.

...drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they (the drivers) are [likely to exceed] the current one (speed limit).

Parallelism helps make the comparison clear:
What drivers WILL BE likely to do is compared to what they ARE likely to do.
The PROPOSED SPEED LIMIT is compared to the CURRENT ONE.

[RBBmba@2014]

...drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they (the drivers) are [likely to exceed] the current one (speed limit).

...drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are (to exceed) the current one.

Hi GMATGuruNY - a quick question on your above TWO quotes.

The FIRST one seems to be MORE accurate. Am I correct ?

[thang]

E is still incorrect.
we can not have an elipsis as in E.

[RBBmba@2014]

Hi GMATGuruNY - could you please share your quick feedback on my above concern ?

[GMATGuruNY]

...drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they (the drivers) are [likely to exceed] the current one (speed limit).

...drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are (to exceed) the current one.

Hi GMATGuruNY - a quick question on your above TWO quotes.

The FIRST one seems to be MORE accurate. Am I correct ?

Yes.

[sagarock]

.





...drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they (the drivers) are [likely to exceed] the current one (speed limit).

Parallelism helps make the comparison clear:
What drivers WILL BE likely to do is compared to what they ARE likely to do.
The PROPOSED SPEED LIMIT is compared to the CURRENT ONE.[/quote]

GMAT GURU NY sir,why how is to exceed justified here? As they are already breaching the current one ,so isnt it should be exceeding? we use infinitive 'to' only when we imply some futuristic purpose.Kindly help

[sagarock]

GMATGuruNY SIR,kindly reply.Thank you





...drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they (the drivers) are [likely to exceed] the current one (speed limit).

Parallelism helps make the comparison clear:
What drivers WILL BE likely to do is compared to what they ARE likely to do.
The PROPOSED SPEED LIMIT is compared to the CURRENT ONE.[/quote]

GMAT GURU NY sir,why how is to exceed justified here? As they are already breaching the current one ,so isnt it should be exceeding? we use infinitive 'to' only when we imply some futuristic purpose.Kindly help[/quote]

[GMATGuruNY]

...drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they (the drivers) are [likely to exceed] the current one (speed limit).

Parallelism helps make the comparison clear:
What drivers WILL BE likely to do is compared to what they ARE likely to do.
The PROPOSED SPEED LIMIT is compared to the CURRENT ONE.

GMAT GURU NY sir,why how is to exceed justified here? As they are already breaching the current one ,so isnt it should be exceeding? we use infinitive 'to' only when we imply some futuristic purpose.Kindly help

Drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are exceeding the current one.
Here, blue portion conveys a PROBABILITY (the likelihood that drivers will exceed the proposed speed limit), while the red portion conveys a FACT (drivers ARE EXCEEDING the current speed limit).
This comparison is illogical.
A probability cannot be compared to a fact.

Mary is likely to win the game.
Conveyed meaning:
The PROBABILITY that Mary will win the game is high.

The intent of the OA is to compare ONE PROBABILITY TO ANOTHER PROBABILITY:
Drivers will be as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are likely to exceed the current one.
Here, the two blue portions each convey a PROBABILITY.
This comparison is logical.