X did more than did Y vs X did more than Y did

[prengasn]

The following sentences are taken from MGMAT/SC/P101
We have the comparative structure in the following sentences:
1. The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than did anyone else in the industry.
2. Three times more students attended the prom this year than did last year

Then we have a different comparative structure in the following sentences:
2. The blue dress looks more flattering on you than the red one does.
3. Sam was away on vocation longer than his friends were."

Why can't we use in the second and the third sentences the same the structure as in the first sentence, changing them as follows?
1. The blue dress looks more flattering on you than does the red one"
2. Sam was away on vocation longer than were his friends."

What is the rule here? Thanks a lot for your help.

[deadpig1987hahaha]

actually I think you can invert the sentence if you want.

and you know in these 2 sentence you give:
1. The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than did anyone else in the industry.
2. Three times more students attended the prom this year than did last year

the first one is a inversion but the second one is the omit of the subject "˜students".
1. The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than anyone else in the industry did.
2. Three times more students attended the prom this year than (students) did last year

[RonPurewal]

as for your question about including vs. not including the helping verb:
YOU ONLY NEED THE HELPING VERB IF THE SENTENCE IS AMBIGUOUS WITHOUT IT.
if not, it's superfluous. see this post (click here).

The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than did anyone else in the industry.

yeah.

first of all, you NEED a "did" somewhere, because the sentence is ambiguous without it.
without "did", it could mean "contributed more to the candidate's campaign than to anyone else...". or it could mean what it's supposed to mean.
we need "did" to clear up that ambiguity.

this is the ONLY place you can put "did" in this sentence.

you CANNOT do the following:
"than anyone else did in the industry" --> nope. can't separate a noun/pronoun (anyone else) from an adj modifier (in the industry). ever.
"than anyone else in the industry did" --> nope. too far away from the subject.

if it were JUST "anyone", with no modifier, then you could write EITHER "than anyone did" or "than did anyone".

--

1. The blue dress looks more flattering on you than does the red one"

this is not wrong, but there's no ambiguity.
unless you're going to allow, as a second meaning, that you're putting the blue dress onto the red dress. if you allow that as a genuine ambiguity, then you have to write "...than does the red one" OR "...than the red one does".

2. Sam was away on vocation longer than were his friends."

you don't need "were" here, as there is absolutely no possible ambiguity here.

it's not wrong to write it this way; it's just unnecessarily wordy.

[rohit21384]

The following sentences are taken from MGMAT/SC/P101
We have the comparative structure in the following sentences:
1. The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than did anyone else in the industry.
2. Three times more students attended the prom this year than did last year

Then we have a different comparative structure in the following sentences:
2. The blue dress looks more flattering on you than the red one does.
3. Sam was away on vocation longer than his friends were."

Why can't we use in the second and the third sentences the same the structure as in the first sentence, changing them as follows?
1. The blue dress looks more flattering on you than does the red one"
2. Sam was away on vocation longer than were his friends."

What is the rule here? Thanks a lot for your help.

There is the rule:
In parallel structure, whenever we have omitted words, the exact omitted word must be present somewhere in the sentence in exactly same form.

Please see the below sentence:

The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than did "contribute "anyone else in the industry.

here the bolded word "contibute" is omitted/ elided but nowhere in the sentence we have "contribute". Though "contributed "is there but we are not allowed to change tense.

Another case in point:

"He wins gold medal in this year's annual sports competition as he did in last year's."
After "did" win is implied but the word "win" is not present in the above sentence.

Please advise ?

Following is the another question (Source-self), which is modified version of a question appeared in OG-10.

XYZ are so distant that its light has taken million of years to reach earth; consequently, we see it as it was during the formation of the universe.

The above sentence is correct.
Earlier I though that "seen" would be implied after "was" in "we see it as it was during ". But if " seen" had been implied then this wouldn't have been the right answer.

So, I my opinion nothing is implied after "was" here. Further, since light from XYZ took million of years to reach Earth, therefore XYZ cannot be seen during the formation of the universe which happened million of years ago...

Please help on this issue.

[RonPurewal]

hi -

There is the rule:
In parallel structure, whenever we have omitted words, the exact omitted word must be present somewhere in the sentence in exactly same form.

Please see the below sentence:

The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than did "contribute "anyone else in the industry.

this is not a case of omitted words; it's a case of substituted words.
you can use "do" or "did" to stand for another action verb.
this is sort of like the way in which you can use "that of..." or "those of..." to stand for nouns. those constructions don't count as omitted words, either.

in this case, the past-tense "did" stands for the past-tense action verb "contributed".
take out "did" and replace it with "contributed", and there you are.

here the bolded word "contibute" is omitted/ elided but nowhere in the sentence we have "contribute". Though "contributed "is there but we are not allowed to change tense.

incorrect analysis; see above.

to repeat, this sort of helping "do" or "did" STANDS FOR an action verb, in exactly the same way that a pronoun stands for a noun.

"He wins gold medal in this year's annual sports competition as he did in last year's."

this sentence doesn't make any sense if "wins" is in the present tense. if you can actually say something like this in any reasonable context, then the athlete in question must already have won the medals; therefore, "wins" should be "won".

he won as many gold medals in this year's competition as he did in last year's.

"did" STANDS FOR "won". note the tense parallelism.
in this case, there IS a case of omitted words: "competition" is omitted after "last year's". this follows the rule above, exactly.

After "did" win is implied but the word "win" is not present in the above sentence.

nope. again, you're misunderstanding the nature of "did"/"do". see above.

Following is the another question (Source-self), which is modified version of a question appeared in OG-10.

XYZ are so distant that its light has taken million of years to reach earth; consequently, we see it as it was during the formation of the universe.

no implied words here.

if a wife tells her husband, "i love you just as you are", then that's a complete sentence with no omitted or implied words. it's just as he is - i.e., in the state in which he currently exists.

this is the same with this sentence. "as it was" is a complete expression, equivalent to "in the state in which it existed at the time".