why A is wrong ? SC

[Chi HoC263]

Hi Ron,

What is wrong with Ans (D) then? It correctly uses "subject to" and "standard for". So it is wrong because "they" as a pronoun does not have a clear antecedent?

Cheers

[RonPurewal]

choice D contains the most blatant misuse of "which" i've ever seen in a GMAC problem.

(usually, when "which" is wrong, it still follows a noun -- just not the right noun. in this problem, on the other hand, "which" doesn't follow a noun at all!)

[Kovid]

Hi Ron,

I want to understand more about correct ans C.

I am not questioning the correct Ans but I want to understand what is the verb in the following line
" and therefore not subject to emission-control standards as stringent as those for diesel-powered vehicle"

[RonPurewal]

there's no verb.

that's a modifier that is parallel to "gasoline-powered".

[RickyH486]

Hi ,

Why the option B is wrong ?

* "Standards of vehicles" doesn't make sense; you need "standards for vehicles" -- i.e., standards that the vehicles must meet. ("Standards of vehicles" implies that the vehicles themselves somehow have "standards", rather than that those standards are imposed upon them.)

* "Subjected to" means "forced to undergo", e.g., Many shelter animals have been subjected to abuse by their previous owners.
Emissions standards are rules that apply to the vehicles, but not processes that the vehicles can be forced to undergo; that's the meaning of "subject to". (You could write, for instance, that the vehicles are subjected to intense emissions tests -- i.e., they are forced to undergo those tests.)

Hi Ron, in one of your posts you have told us to follow the SC priorities: 1. frequently tested things that are not extremely idiomatic/subtle (e.g parallelism, pronoun, modifier) 2. frequently tested things that are extremely idiomatic/subtle (e.g verb tenses, idioms) 3. infrequently tested things. My first question is would you consider these two mistakes that you have pointed out in B a type 2 mistake or a type 3 mistake?

I also have a question regarding choice B: "not subjected to emissions-control standards that are as stringent as those of ", when I first attempted this question in the prep I found B has the extra "that are" in the sentence compare to choice C. I feel having "that are" creates a different meaning of the sentence compare to C, but I really don't know what the difference is. Could you let me know whether my feel is right or wrong?

[RonPurewal]

actually, i'd put the "of"/"for" difference in category #1.
i mean, think about it—the fundamental meanings of "for" and "of" are basically opposites. (in general, something "OF x" BELONGS to x, whereas something "FOR x" is EXTERNALLY IMPOSED on x... this difference is all you need here.)

--

"that are" doesn't alter the meaning in any way; it's simply unnecessary.

[ToanD19]

Hi Ron,
I'm a non-native so my guts might be wrong, but I find all the answers a bit awkward. even the OA is hard for me to digest:

Though the law will require emissions testing of all diesel vehicles, from tractor trailers to excursion buses, it will have no effect on sport utility vehicles, almost all of which are gasoline powered and therefore not subject to emissions-control standards as stringent as those for diesel-powered vehicles

it is confusing to me: the standards are the things up for comparison? not the gasoline powered vehicles vs. diesel powered vehicles?
I want to confirm if it sounds perfectly fine to native ears (so that I will change my ears accordingly)

[RonPurewal]

don't think in terms of "awkwardness" or "your ear". if you do that, you'll just be making random guesses.

(that doesn't work for native speakers, either -- since no one is a native speaker of formal WRITTEN english.)

[RAHULS852]

Hi Sage /Manhattan expert,

After reading all post ,I understand many errors in wrong choices but I would like to understand more errors.
In (A) is use of "they" right in construction "emissions-control standards as stringent as they are" ?
"it & they" generally refer same actual antecedent but "that & those" create a new copy. So "they" here is referring to same emission standards for both gasoline powered vehicle and diesel powered vehicle.
Here actual comparison is between Standards for A vs Standards for B. So "those" will be better.
Is my reasoning right ?

One more question regarding parallelism-
"and" creates parallelism in C [ gasoline powered (modifier) and therefore..(modifier)].
in A "almost all of which are gasoline powered, and will not be subjected to emissions-control standards" both parts around "and" are not parallel in terms of meaning.
There was traffic on road and I was late. ( meaning wise this construction is not right)
There was traffic on road and so I was late. (This sentence is right because both parts around and are reinforcing each other)
So can I eliminate A based on above logic.( therefore is required for proper meaning)
"almost all of which are gasoline powered, and therefore not subject to emissions-control standards"
Is my logic right ?

Regards,
Rahul Singh

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

"it & they" generally refer same actual antecedent but "that & those" create a new copy.

Are you quoting this as a rule? If so, it's not accurate. I can easily think up a sentence with 'it' and 'they' that has multiple nouns. For example: 'I gave a cake to my friends and they ate it.' This is totally fine as a sentence because the meaning is clear. This is something to bear in mind when looking for antecedents for pronouns: does the sentence make sense? Connected with this is the idea of applying a 'principle of charity', i.e. when analyzing a sentence we should take the most logical interpretation. For example the sentence 'I gave some cherries to my friends and they ate them.' This sentence is fine, because a reasonable interpretation is that my friends ate the cherries. Many GMAT students become overly critical and might say "That sentence is ambiguous because we're not sure if the cherries ate my friends." This kind of thinking is obstinate.

"and" creates parallelism in C [ gasoline powered (modifier) and therefore..(modifier)].
in A "almost all of which are gasoline powered, and will not be subjected to emissions-control standards" both parts around "and" are not parallel in terms of meaning.
There was traffic on road and I was late. ( meaning wise this construction is not right)
There was traffic on road and so I was late. (This sentence is right because both parts around and are reinforcing each other)
So can I eliminate A based on above logic.( therefore is required for proper meaning)

Yes, I agree: answer A seems to suggest that these two events are independent. There's also the problem with 'subjected' as discussed by Ron above.

[RAHULS852]

Thanks Sage for your clarification.

I would like to understand more about "that" and "it"

1) Trade regulation of US government is more stable than that of China government.
here "that" refers to "Trade regulation". Here comparison is between trade regulation of US vs Trade regulation of China.

2) Since 1990 the global economy has grown more than it did during the 10,000 years from the beginning of agriculture to 1950
here "it" refers to global economy because we are talking about same global economy.

3) The air quality of California is much worse than that of Los Angeles.
Here comparison is between air quality of California and LA.

4) The air quality of California is higher now than it was 10 years ago.
"it"= Air quality of California . Here comparison is between same air quality at different time period.

5) The air quality of California 20 years ago was substantially worse than it is now.
Here use of "it" will be wrong because here "it" refers to subject with modifier (it= The air quality of California 20 years ago).

A) powered, and will not be subjected to emissions-control standards as stringent as they are for
so in choice (A) Will "they" not refer to same standards for both diesel vehicles and sport utility vehicles ?

Perhaps I am getting over critical but I am trying to understand more clearly.

Regards,
Rahul Singh

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

Good examples. You can see the difference between 'it' and 'that' in comparisons. You can see from your examples (1) and (3) that we use 'that' when we're comparing nouns, e.g. the regulation of China vs. the regulation of the US. Your examples (2) and (4) use 'it' to compare actions of the same noun.

I think the natural rewrite of your example (5) is "The air quality in California was substantially worse 20 years ago than it is now."

A) powered, and will not be subjected to emissions-control standards as stringent as they are for
so in choice (A) Will "they" not refer to same standards for both diesel vehicles and sport utility vehicles ?

Tough question. Since the text simply mentions 'emissions-control standards' without a modifier, then I'm not sure if it's a problem. As much as I can see that you want to understand this deeply, I think this issue is too much of a nuance to be useful. I encourage you to focus on the other issues in answer (A), namely the idiom issue mentioned by Ron above, and the problem I'll describe here.

When we read (A), to make it logical, it needs to say:
...will not be subjected to emissions-control standards as stringent as they [the standards] are [stringent] for...
However, the missing word after "are" could be filled in differently:
...will not be subjected to emissions-control standards as stringent as they are [subjected to] for...
This second reading isn't logical, but it's too easy to read the comparison as comparing two verbs (it would be nicely parallel). This would make the pronoun 'they' refer to 'sports utility vehicles', giving the sentence a totally illogical meaning.

[RAHULS852]

When we read (A), to make it logical, it needs to say:
...will not be subjected to emissions-control standards as stringent as they [the standards] are [stringent] for...
However, the missing word after "are" could be filled in differently:
...will not be subjected to emissions-control standards as stringent as they are [subjected to] for...
This second reading isn't logical, but it's too easy to read the comparison as comparing two verbs (it would be nicely parallel). This would make the pronoun 'they' refer to 'sports utility vehicles', giving the sentence a totally illogical meaning.

Thanks Sage
I got your point, I should focus on major issues in choice A.
I understand that 'they" in choice A is problematic but i could not get highlighted point (marked in bold) explicitly.

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

The idea is that in some sentences (such as the example above) GMAT will leave out some words rather than repeating them. A simpler example would be: Louis hasn't been to Germany as often as his sister has [been to Germany]. We don't need to repeat the words 'been to Germany' - it's clear enough what the sentence is comparing. However, in other cases, leaving out words might make a sentence unclear. For example: My dog is standing on the grass that is green, as is Julia. Here, the meaning is unclear: does the sentence mean to say that Julia is green or Julia is standing on the grass? Analyze the sentence above an you might see that there are two possible meanings there too.

[RAHULS852]

Got your point now.
Thanks Sage for perfect explanation.

Regards,
Rahul Singh