In california today

[thanghnvn]

[quote="BG"]In California today, Hispanics under the age of eighteen account for more than 43%, compared with a decade ago, when it was about 35%.
A.......
B.Of the Californians under the age of eighteen, today more than 43% of them are Hispanic, compared with a decade ago, when it was about 35%.
C.Today, more than 43% of Californians under the age of eighteen are Hispanic, compared with about 35% decade ago.
D.Today, compared to a decade ago, Californians who are Hispanics under the age of eighteen account for more than 43%, whereas it was about 35%.
E. Today, Hispanics under the age of eighteen in California account for more than 43%, unlike a decade ago, when it was about 35%.

I want to learn from the OA.pls, help

in choice C, "comapred with...." refers to "43% of..." and is adverb of the main clause. "compared with..." can not work as pure adjective because we can not put "compared with..." touching the "43% of...". this putting is non sense.

the similar case is "comma+doing" which refers to subject of main clause and works as an adverb of main clause.

is my thinking correct? I am not sure. pls, confirm

gmat sc makes us able to write and we are only able to write if we know the grammatical role of the entities.

[RonPurewal]

don't overcomplicate the issue.

the salient point here is that "compared to xxxx" should follow the statistic that is actually being compared to xxxx.

"%43 of blah blah blah are hispanic" is a statement of a statistic, so you're good there.
no point in worrying about grammar issues beyond that.

[gbyhats]

Hi Dear Manhattan Instructors ;)

Can I rule out (A), (B), (D) & (E) by saying "no idea about what 'it' refers to?" (I replicated the original question below)

It appears that no one ever point this out "it" can instantly kill four options, making me worry that I may be wrong...

In California today, Hispanics under the age of eighteen account for more than 43 percent, compared with a decade ago, when it was about 35 percent.

A. In California today, Hispanics under the age of eighteen account for more than 43 percent, compared with a decade ago, when it was about 35 percent.
B. Of the Californians under the age of eighteen, today more than 43 percent of them are Hispanic, compared with a decade ago, when it was about 35 percent.
C. Today, more than 43 percent of Californians under the age of eighteen are Hispanic, compared with about 35 percent a decade ago.
D. Today, compared to a decade ago, Californians who are Hispanics under the age of eighteen account for more than 43 percent, whereas it was about 35 percent.
E. Today, Hispanics under the age of eighteen in California account for more than 43 percent, unlike a decade ago, when it was about 35 percent.

[RonPurewal]

absolutely correct.

logically, "it" would have to stand for "the proportion/percentage of californians who are hispanic", but no such thing appears in any of those choices.

[RonPurewal]

...and i'm glad to see that you're keeping the simple things simple. that's one of the most important aspects of SC.

[gbyhats]

...and i'm glad to see that you're keeping the simple things simple. that's one of the most important aspects of SC.

Thank you! ;)

That's actually the #1 gold rule you taught me earlier in this year

[RonPurewal]

excellent.

[sukriti.bahl]

Hi Ron,

In one of your posts you have mentioned that compared to/with cannot be used with more/less/greater/bigger than . It is basically redundant. Please refer to your post below:

"if you have a sentence that says "compared to/with" (or similar constructions, including "in comparison to", "as compared to/with", etc.), then the sentence CANNOT also use a comparison word, such as more, less, greater, prefer, better, worse, X times as much, etc.

to use "compared to/with", you just STATE statistics, without using any other comparison word.

examples:
this year's unemployment rate of 12% is three times as great compared to the rate in 1994 --> incorrect (redundant)

the correct way to write it:
this year's unemployment rate is 12%, compared to 4% in 1994
i.e., you just come out and SAY the statistics, and then give "compared to"."

However in this particular question the correct answer uses both together..

Could you please explain the rule once again.. I blindly chose E because I saw that all choices contain more than with compared.

Thanks,
Sukriti

Why is A wrong?
Why is E wrong?

both of these choices are wrong for the same reason: neither of them specifies what we're taking percentages of.
you need to say "43% of californians", or "43% of the population of california", or 43% of... something.

In C,
"More than 43% of Californians under the age of eighteen are Hispanic" has different meaning with" Hispanics under the age of eighteen account for more than 43%". Which one is correct?

the first is correct, because it actually means something. see above.
also, as remarked above, you know that the first one is correct, because it's in the correct answer.

--

if you append "...of california's population" onto the end of the second one, so that it actually becomes meaningful, then it says something quite different from the meaning of the first one. post back if you don't see the difference.

"Compared" follows "Hispanic" immediately, does it mean "compared" modify "Hispanic"?

first: you know it can't, because that's the correct answer. if "hispanic" were erroneously compared to a percentage, then this couldn't be the correct answer.
apparently, "compared with"/"compared to" can be used to modify the statistic in the preceding clause, even if that statistic doesn't come right before the comma. this is a lesson that you can draw by yourself from looking at this problem, simply by noting what appears in the correct answer.

In my view, "compared" should modify "43%".

well, sure. it must, for the sentence to make any sense at all.
so clearly the lesson you should learn here is that this particular type of modifier is more flexible than you had thought. you should obviously not conclude that the correct answer contains an ungrammatical modifier.
remember: correct answers are correct.

"are Hispanic" , "are Hispanics", "is Hispanic" or " is Hispanics". Which one is correct?

oh boy.
actually, ALL of these can be correct, in the proper context, although the last is a bit awkward.

the first two, of course, must go with something plural. in this case, that would be "43% of californians".
they both make sense, though; the only difference is that "hispanic" is an adjective while "hispanics" is a plural noun. the difference is akin to the distinction between "43% of the pills seized were yellow" and "43% of the pills seized were yellow pills".

the last two must go with something singular, which, in this case, would be "43% of the population".
they both make sense, but "is Hispanics" is too awkward in my opinion; it would be better written as "consists of hispanics".[/quote]

[RonPurewal]

please be careful with the 'quote' function (and please do not quote such huge chunks of text unnecessarily). thank you.

--

"more than 43 percent" is NOT a comparison. (this should be obvious, because 35 is not more than 43!)

rather, "more than 43 percent" is a single statistic. it just has a bit more uncertainty than the other figure. but that's fine—in real life some statistics are more precise than others.

the two statistics are 'more than 43 percent' and '35 percent'.
the 'compared' structure is used with these two statistics exactly as it should be.

[RonPurewal]

analogy:
last year dave went to see the doctor. at that appointment he weighed 186 pounds (an exact measurement).
since then dave has clearly gained weight. i don't know exactly how much he weighs (from just looking at him), but i can tell that it's north of 200 pounds.
--> Dave now weighs over 200 pounds, compared to 186 pounds last year.

the two statistics are 'over 200 pounds' and '186 pounds'.
the second one is more precise than the first one... and that's totally fine.

[fionaw752]

absolutely correct.

logically, "it" would have to stand for "the proportion/percentage of californians who are hispanic", but no such thing appears in any of those choices.

Hi Ron, I have a question about this point, could please help me? Thanks in advance.
When I analyse thses choices, I thought "it" may stand for "Hispanics under the age of eighteen", reference quoted your explaination from another post: "the point of 'it'/'they' is to refer to the same people/things referenced earlier in the sentence.
these pronouns take the noun from earlier ALONG WITH THE SPECIFIC IDENTITY IN CONTEXT, and ALONG WITH ALL MODIFIERS that accompany the noun."
but in this thread, "it" stands for "the proportion/percentage of californians who are hispanic", how to analyse this usage here?
besides, I think the one of the errors about this comparison is: when we comapre " Hispanics under the age of eighteen account for more than 43 percent") with another statistic, at least the latter part should include a verb, which is "does/ accounts". I mean, in choice A, "was" is not the right verb.
for example: The big house built by my father in 2005 costs more than it did five years ago.
here, "it" stands for "the big house built by my father in 2005", and in the latter part we cannot use "was" but "did"

I hope I have expressed my idea clearly.
Ron, would please correct me? Thank you very much.

[jabgt]

if you have "better" or "worse" (or any "__er" comparison——bigger, faster, stronger, etc.), then "compared to/with" is redundant.

in statistical observations (such as the one in this sentence), the point of "compared to/with" is simply to place two statistics side by side, letting the reader draw his/her own conclusions.
as noted above, there should not be another comparison word. redundancy makes me cry. (it makes me cry tears...)

Ron Sir, you make me burst out laughing! I find generally successful and smart people have a great sense of humor. Thank you, Sir!

[RonPurewal]

lol... you're welcome.