anusuthakaran Wrote:Hi Emily,
I need to revisit this explanation.
I enjoy watching romantic comedies, like my friends.
Since we have a comma before 'like' i dont think there is any ambiguity.
Similar to the example given in SC strategy guide :
I want to coach divers, LIKE Greg Louganis. = Like Greg Louganis, I want to coach divers.
I enjoy watching romantic comedies LIKE my friends. This sentence, without the comma, is ambiguous as you point out.
(1) I concede that you are right, but with some hesitation.The closest OG example I found is #82 (owning and living...is a goal of a majority, like that of earlier generations). The original is rejected because the phrase after the comma is "not parallel to the main clause," i.e. it is not subject-verb-that of earlier generations.
However, the underlined phrase is parallel to the object of the main verb: a goal of a majority of young adults = that (a goal) of earlier generations.
This seems to indicate that the GMAT is not cool with "X is Y, like Z" if what you are trying to say is (X is Y) and (X was Z), too. But then again, maybe the different timeframes in the owning-and-living example necessitate a verb in each clause. If so, I wondered whether the GMAT would accept:
Chocolate is a flavor for ice cream, like that for cake. I doubt it, even though the comparison is parallel, and the present tense verb applies to both objects.
So now that I think of it, this supports your assertion that "I enjoy watching romantic comedies, like my friends" would not be interpreted as "I enjoy watching romantic comedies and watching my friends, too." So, I'm willing to concede that the comma in "I enjoy watching romantic comedies, like my friends" serves to clarify that the like phrase should modify the verb, not the object. If we intended to say comedies = friends, then we would have left the comma out.
But I still think it would be ideal to avoid like-at-the-end constructions, because they CAN be ambiguous. The GMAT seems to avoid them as well. The exception...
(2) The "quack like a duck" exception. In #V100 "like" is used at the end. However, it follows a verb directly, and with no comma.
Computers that can reason like an expert = reason as an expert does.
The Bangles encouraged us to walk like an Egyptian = walk as an Egyptian would.
If it quacks like a duck, it quacks as a duck does.
I want to coach like Greg Louganis = coach as he does.
Note that all of these examples have "like" immediately following and modifying the verb, with no intervening object to muddy the waters.
(3) Finally, I don’t entirely agree with this example in the book:I want to coach divers, LIKE Greg Louganis. ---equals----Like Greg Louganis, I want to coach divers.
Couldn't this imply that both Greg Louganis and I simply
want to coach divers? Wishful thinking on the part of both of us, rather than the intended meaning that Mr. Louganis actually
does coach, but I only
aspire to.
This ambiguity results from having two verbs: want (in present tense) and to coach (infinitive). It’s unclear whether the "like" phrase modifies one or both. In fact, in this case the meaning is probably more unclear/wrong when "like" is at the beginning, parallel to "I" such that the two subjects share both verbs by default.
In summary:While exceptions to the like-at-the-beginning-and-only-to-compare-nouns rule exist, they are not always clear cut. The likelihood of the GMAT testing the issue to this level is remote.