Comparison confusion. Please help!

[rjain84]

Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paving about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than they were last year.

A. Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than they were

B. Heating-oil prices are expected to rice higher this year over last because refiners pay about $5 a barrel for crude oil than they did

C. Expectations are for heating-oil prices to be higher this year than last year's because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel fr crude oil more than they did

D. It is the expectation that heating-oil prices will be higher for this year over last because refiners are pauing about $5 a barrel more for crude oil now than what they were

E. It is expected that heating-oil prices will rise higher this year than last year's because refiners pay about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did

Source: OG-13
OA: A

My doubt:

From what I understand is that we are comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "heating-oil prices last year".

Choice A is comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "last year". How is this the valid comparison? Shouldn't the comparison be "than last year's" or "than those of last year" to make it a parallel comparison?

[Kasia@EconomistGMAT]

Answer A makes a comparison between the price that refiners are paying now with the price that they were paying last year. The sentence uses ellipsis. A part of the verb "were paying" was elided for the sentence to become more concise.
Compare:
Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than REFINERS were PAYING last year.

[rjain84]

Answer A makes a comparison between the price that refiners are paying now with the price that they were paying last year. The sentence uses ellipsis. A part of the verb "were paying" was elided for the sentence to become more concise.
Compare:
Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than REFINERS were PAYING last year.

Hey Kasia, Thanks for explaining but I got the comparison in the second half of the sentence. What I didn't understand was the comparison in the first half - "Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last". How are they parallel? The sentence is comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "last year". IMO, that's illogical.

[GMATGuruNY]

My doubt:

From what I understand is that we are comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "heating-oil prices last year".

Choice A is comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "last year". How is this the valid comparison? Shouldn't the comparison be "than last year's" or "than those of last year" to make it a parallel comparison?

ELLIPSIS is the omission of words whose presence is understood.
Answer choice A:
HEATING-OIL PRICES are expected to be higher this year than [HEATING-OIL PRICES were] last [year].
Here, the bracketed words are omitted, but their presence is understood.
The omission is warranted because the SAME PRICES are being compared from one year to the next.
CITY A'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY A'S PRICE was last year.
CITY B'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY B'S PRICE was last year.
CITY C'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY C'S PRICE was last year.
All together:
HEATING-OIL PRICES are expected to be higher this year than HEATING-OIL PRICES were last year.
Since each clause refers to the SAME PRICES, the comparison is made more concise by omitting the subject from the second clause:
Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last.

[rjain84]

My doubt:

From what I understand is that we are comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "heating-oil prices last year".

Choice A is comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "last year". How is this the valid comparison? Shouldn't the comparison be "than last year's" or "than those of last year" to make it a parallel comparison?

ELLIPSIS is the omission of words whose presence is understood.
Answer choice A:
HEATING-OIL PRICES are expected to be higher this year than [HEATING-OIL PRICES were] last [year].
Here, the bracketed words are omitted, but their presence is understood.
The omission is warranted because the SAME PRICES are being compared from one year to the next.
CITY A'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY A'S PRICE was last year.
CITY B'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY B'S PRICE was last year.
CITY C'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY C'S PRICE was last year.
All together:
HEATING-OIL PRICES are expected to be higher this year than HEATING-OIL PRICES were last year.
Since each clause refers to the SAME PRICES, the comparison is made more concise by omitting the subject from the second clause:
Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last.

That's a wonderful explanation. Thanks Mitch! But I still have my doubts. How can we be 100% sure if the presence of omitted words is understood? In this sentence, for example, the comparison is creating ambiguity. There are 2 possibilities -

1. Heating-oil prices this year are higher than the heating-oil prices of last year.
or, more subtle
2) Heating-oil prices this year are higher than last year. (Here, we are comparing two things this year - "heating-oil prices" and "last year". It's weird and can't be possible in the real world but its ambiguous at the same time).

[neha24]

2) Heating-oil prices this year are higher than last year. (Here, we are comparing two things this year - "heating-oil prices" and "last year". It's weird and can't be possible in the real world but its ambiguous at the same time).

i guess u r taking ambiguity in a wrong sense .things are ambiguous when 2 or more sensible meaning can be arrived ."heating oil prices" can nowhere be compared to "last year" ."price of one year" can be compared to "price of another year"

though i have some question to Mitch and Kasia abt ellipses : when u making a tense shift as we doing in this sentence (we are comparing prices that are going to be in future to prices that were in the past) aren't we suppose to make that tense visible in the sentence and not just put it elided as we have done here

[rjain84]

2) Heating-oil prices this year are higher than last year. (Here, we are comparing two things this year - "heating-oil prices" and "last year". It's weird and can't be possible in the real world but its ambiguous at the same time).

i guess u r taking ambiguity in a wrong sense .things are ambiguous when 2 or more sensible meaning can be arrived ."heating oil prices" can nowhere be compared to "last year" ."price of one year" can be compared to "price of another year"

If we go by your logic then this sentence should also be correct -

Amy chances of success are higher than Betty.

Since comparing "Amy chances of success" with "Betty" is nonsensical, there is only one possibility left. It can only compare Amy chances of success with Betty chances of success and therefore there is no ambiguity in the sentence.

[GMATGuruNY]

My doubt:

From what I understand is that we are comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "heating-oil prices last year".

Choice A is comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "last year". How is this the valid comparison? Shouldn't the comparison be "than last year's" or "than those of last year" to make it a parallel comparison?

ELLIPSIS is the omission of words whose presence is understood.
Answer choice A:
HEATING-OIL PRICES are expected to be higher this year than [HEATING-OIL PRICES were] last [year].
Here, the bracketed words are omitted, but their presence is understood.
The omission is warranted because the SAME PRICES are being compared from one year to the next.
CITY A'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY A'S PRICE was last year.
CITY B'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY B'S PRICE was last year.
CITY C'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY C'S PRICE was last year.
All together:
HEATING-OIL PRICES are expected to be higher this year than HEATING-OIL PRICES were last year.
Since each clause refers to the SAME PRICES, the comparison is made more concise by omitting the subject from the second clause:
Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last.

That's a wonderful explanation. Thanks Mitch! But I still have my doubts. How can we be 100% sure if the presence of omitted words is understood? In this sentence, for example, the comparison is creating ambiguity. There are 2 possibilities -

1. Heating-oil prices this year are higher than the heating-oil prices of last year.
or, more subtle
2) Heating-oil prices this year are higher than last year. (Here, we are comparing two things this year - "heating-oil prices" and "last year". It's weird and can't be possible in the real world but its ambiguous at the same time).

When one clause is compared to another, the two clauses generally will be PARALLEL in form.
Since this year serves as a MODIFIER in the first clause, the default interpretation is that its COUNTERPART in the second clause -- last year -- also serves as a modifier.
Thus, there is no ambiguity: we know that PRICES this year are being compared to PRICES last year.

[rjain84]

My doubt:

From what I understand is that we are comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "heating-oil prices last year".

Choice A is comparing "Heating-oil prices this year" with "last year". How is this the valid comparison? Shouldn't the comparison be "than last year's" or "than those of last year" to make it a parallel comparison?

ELLIPSIS is the omission of words whose presence is understood.
Answer choice A:
HEATING-OIL PRICES are expected to be higher this year than [HEATING-OIL PRICES were] last [year].
Here, the bracketed words are omitted, but their presence is understood.
The omission is warranted because the SAME PRICES are being compared from one year to the next.
CITY A'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY A'S PRICE was last year.
CITY B'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY B'S PRICE was last year.
CITY C'S PRICE is expected to be higher this year than CITY C'S PRICE was last year.
All together:
HEATING-OIL PRICES are expected to be higher this year than HEATING-OIL PRICES were last year.
Since each clause refers to the SAME PRICES, the comparison is made more concise by omitting the subject from the second clause:
Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last.

That's a wonderful explanation. Thanks Mitch! But I still have my doubts. How can we be 100% sure if the presence of omitted words is understood? In this sentence, for example, the comparison is creating ambiguity. There are 2 possibilities -

1. Heating-oil prices this year are higher than the heating-oil prices of last year.
or, more subtle
2) Heating-oil prices this year are higher than last year. (Here, we are comparing two things this year - "heating-oil prices" and "last year". It's weird and can't be possible in the real world but its ambiguous at the same time).

When one clause is compared to another, the two clauses generally will be PARALLEL in form.
Since this year serves as a MODIFIER in the first clause, the default interpretation is that its COUNTERPART in the second clause -- last year -- also serves as a modifier.
Thus, there is no ambiguity: we know that PRICES this year are being compared to PRICES last year.

Makes sense to me now. Thank you very much Mitch for clarifying this! Would really appreciate if you could give some examples of sentences that compare clauses and use ellipsis for the comparison.

[neha24]

rjain84 wrote :If we go by your logic then this sentence should also be correct -

Amy chances of success are higher than Betty.

Since comparing "Amy chances of success" with "Betty" is nonsensical, there is only one possibility left. It can only compare Amy chances of success with Betty chances of success and therefore there is no ambiguity in the sentence.

the ambiguity i was talking of i will illustrate with an example :
a leopard cannot catch a wild beast as fast as cheetah

now this sentence is ambiguous because in this we can get 2 sensible and compatible meaning

a leopard cannot catch a wild beast as fast as cheetah can

or

a leopard cannot catch a wild beast as fast as it can a cheetah


the sentence that u were talking of oil prices isn't ambiguous coz the other meaning that u derived was nonsensical

now for ur this sentence :Amy chances of success are higher than Betty.

this sentence is wrong not ambiguous because the comparison is wrong at the first place also amy's chances sud have been used (i feel that u forgot amy's)

u need it this way :Amy's chances of success are higher than Betty's

[tanviet]

when dose the elipsis is considered not ambiguous?

if we do ellipsis, we may create the ambiguity.

thank you experts for taking part in this questions.

[[email protected]]

Hello Everyone!

Let's tackle this question, one issue at a time, and narrow it down to the correct answer quickly! To start, here is the original question with any major differences between the options highlighted in orange:

Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than they were last year.

(A) Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than they were
(B) Heating-oil prices are expected to rise higher this year over last because refiners pay about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did
(C) Expectations are for heating-oil prices to be higher this year than last year's because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did
(D) It is the expectation that heating-oil prices will be higher this year over last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil now than what they were
(E) It is the expected that heating-oil prices will rise higher this year than last year's because refiners pay about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did

Because almost the entire sentence is underlined here, there is a lot we can focus on:

1. Heating-oil prices... / Expectations are for heating-oil prices... / It is the expectation that heating-oil prices... (Conciseness/Meaning)
2. than last / over last (Idioms/Parallelism)
3. pay / are paying (Verb Tense/Meaning)
4. ...more for crude oil / ...for crude oil more (Parallelism/Meaning/Conciseness)

The first one that will eliminate 2-3 options right away is #2 on our list: than last vs. over last. This is an issue of idiom usage! We know that it's correct to say that one thing is "higher than" another, and that it is NOT okay to say one thing is "higher over" another. Therefore, we can eliminate the options that use "higher over."

(A) Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than they were
(B) Heating-oil prices are expected to rise higher this year over last because refiners pay about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did
(C) Expectations are for heating-oil prices to be higher this year than last year's because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did
(D) It is the expectation that heating-oil prices will be higher this year over last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil now than what they were
(E) It is the expected that heating-oil prices will rise higher this year than last year's because refiners pay about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did

There you go! We can eliminate options B & D because they don't follow the proper idiom structure "higher than."

The next one that seems easy to tackle is #4 on our list: more for crude oil vs. for crude oil more. Each phrase is grammatically correct, but they mean two completely different things:

...refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil... = The price of each barrel of oil is $5 higher than before.
...refiners are paying about $5 a barrel for crude oil more... = The price of each barrel of oil is only $5, but refiners are paying that $5 more often than before.

It makes more sense to say that the price of a barrel of crude oil increased by $5, rather than saying it's always been $5 and refiners just pay that more often. So let's eliminate the options that mess up the meaning here:

(A) Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel more for crude oil than they were
(C) Expectations are for heating-oil prices to be higher this year than last year's because refiners are paying about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did
(E) It is the expected that heating-oil prices will rise higher this year than last year's because refiners pay about $5 a barrel for crude oil more than they did

There you have it - option A was the correct choice! It uses concise language, correct idioms, and logical meaning! We didn't even have to deal with the other 2 items on our list because we focused on the ones that eliminated 2-3 options at a time.


Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.