Soaring television costs

[nikhilkatira]

Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than it was in any previous election.

A. a greater proportion than it was
B. a greater proportion than
C. a greater proportion than they have been
D. which is greater than was so
E. which is greater than it has been

Please answer with explanation for wrong choices

[tomada]

My answer is: B.

I eliminated choices 'D' and 'E', because which is... seems to incorrectly refer to the presidential election itself, instead of the costs associated with the election. Even if we tie this phrase back to the costs, the word "costs" is plural, while the word "is" refers to the singular case (if anything, "are" should be used).

I eliminated choice 'A' because of the subject-verb (dis)agreement between "costs" (plural) and the "it" (singular) in "than it was".

I eliminated choice 'C' because, while "they" does agree with "costs", the usage of "have been" suggests that the costs continue to soar. However, the sentence is comparing the costs of the 1992 election with elections prior to 1992. Either way, the events have concluded. I'd have more difficulty eliminating 'C' if the phrase was "...they HAD been".

For all I know my reasoning above is faulty, but this is how I analyzed the question.

[Haaress]

1 more for B.

Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than it was in any previous election.

A. a greater proportion than it was - No antecedant for "it".
B. a greater proportion than - Correct - precise omparison.
C. a greater proportion than they have been - No antecedant for "they".
D. which is greater than was so - "when" is the correct modifier of a date , a year etc but not "which"
E. which is greater than it has been - same as D.

[gmatmachoman]

My answer is: B.

I eliminated choices 'D' and 'E', because which is... seems to incorrectly refer to the presidential election itself, instead of the costs associated with the election. Even if we tie this phrase back to the costs, the word "costs" is plural, while the word "is" refers to the singular case (if anything, "are" should be used).

I eliminated choice 'A' because of the subject-verb (dis)agreement between "costs" (plural) and the "it" (singular) in "than it was".

I eliminated choice 'C' because, while "they" does agree with "costs", the usage of "have been" suggests that the costs continue to soar. However, the sentence is comparing the costs of the 1992 election with elections prior to 1992. Either way, the events have concluded. I'd have more difficulty eliminating 'C' if the phrase was "...they HAD been".

For all I know my reasoning above is faulty, but this is how I analyzed the question.

IMO C

[nikhilkatira]

I selected B
according to an unreliable source OA is C

machoman can you please share your thoughts ?

[gmatmachoman]

I selected B
according to an unreliable source OA is C

machoman can you please share your thoughts ?

Nikil bhai..Just now searched for Ron explanation..OA should be B only..what Tomada said is precise...

[nikhilkatira]

I selected B
according to an unreliable source OA is C

machoman can you please share your thoughts ?

Nikil bhai..Just now searched for Ron explanation..OA should be B only..what Tomada said is precise...

Thanks Tomada and Machoman..

[vietnam47]

Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than it was in any previous election.

A. a greater proportion than it was
B. a greater proportion than
C. a greater proportion than they have been
D. which is greater than was so
E. which is greater than it has been
we do not need the following to choose choice b. but the following discussion is good for other questions.
choice b mean
a greater proportion than the proportion the television costs accounted for in any previous election.
this is comparison of 2 nouns as objects of the two clause. a special case.
we can write a full second clause of comparison the above way or you can make ellipsis clause in choice b. no third way.
choice b is special, we can not use "that/those" and "it /they" in the second clause of comparison. we need a full clause with new adverb, "in any previous election" to modify the new "proportion". the new clause modifying "proportion" is new because it has new adverb ".
choice c is terribly wrong.
choice c mean
than they (costs) have been.
this mean
than they(costs) have been counted. this is absurd.
choice c also mean
a greater proportion than cost have been. proportion is compared with cost. this is wrong. if we know that comparison of two objects is special, we will realize that proportion is compared to cost and this is wrong.

we should be know that there are only 2 ways of writing the sentence comparing the two objects because this knowing helps us eliminate the choice, which do not fall into one of the two ways. in the test room, if we do not know the two way of writing, we can not eliminate the wrong answer choices in a few tens second.
the following is from og. I think you know why choice d is wrong. some explanation in other forums is not good enough. but now , you can explain choice d. the key is that there is only two ways of writing this special sentence. remember, though the second clause contain only adverbial , this is not comparison of two context presented by two adverbials. (example of comparison of two contexts is " I am stronger today than yesterday". in this comparison, only adverbial exist in the second clause but it is not comparison of noun". ) comparison is hard.

Most of the country's biggest daily newspapers had lower circulation in the six months from October 1995 through March 1996 than a similar period a year earlier.


(A) a similar period

(B) a similar period's

(C) in a similar period

(D) that in a similar period

(E) that of a similar period