Ron,

I've found one case from PERP. As you mentioned above, is "will soar to a level more than one-third higher than " also right? the OA is B.

If current trends continue, by the year 2010 carbon emissions in the United States will soar to a level more than one-third higher than were those in 1990, according to official projections.
(A) Same
(B) will soar to a level more than one-third higher than that
(C) would soar to a level more than one-third higher than it was
(D) would soar to a level more than one-third higher than those
(E) would soar to a level more than one-third higher than they were
[/quote]

Hi Ron,

Could you please provide an example to clarify ... with adjectival and adverbial phrases...

X has more money now than when the stock market crashed
X has more money now than in 1988
X has more money than he had in 1988


are these all correct.... ???

thanks in advance

sorry..wrong question...belongs somewhere else...pls ignore...

Gellar, your version would be correct since "in 1990" is an adverbial phrase, per Ron's posting.

Hi Ron,

Could you please provide an example to clarify ... with adjectival and adverbial phrases...

X has more money now than when the stock market crashed
X has more money now than in 1988
X has more money than he had in 1988


are these all correct.... ???

thanks in advance -

i don't think the gmat would like any of these constructions all that much.

first two: the gmat would probably ding these for not changing the tensed verb. when you have a parallel structure, the common parts (here, "has ... money") are assumed to apply equally to both parts of the structure; applying that principle here leads to the conclusion that the present tense (has) is being applied to both halves of the parallel construction, including the second half (which is obviously a past event).

in other words: the second sentence expands as "x has more money now than he has in 1988". that's wrong.
the same type of thing applies to the first sentence - again, the second half needs a verb that's fixed in the past tense.

the third part seems fine, although there's something slightly undesirable about it (i can't put my finger on it exactly).

Stancey,
Its really nasty to see someone like you to keep examples of" numbers of " uses here, It shows how mechanical your approach is? The test here is not of a number vs the number that you are quoting strategy guide to say so...its about its numbers...

that said a couple of more things:

as for as source goes please note that many questions from OG is repeated in GMATPREP so if somebody says he/she got it from GMATPREP the question itself could be from OG but that person is still 110% honest as he encountered a repeat from OG in GMATPREP.

The question being referred here is from OG-10 QN 251 and repeat in OG-11 verbal supplement QN 72.

Here is the brief explanation from OG that is 1000 times better than the ones of yours(Ron included)

See it:
OG-10:A, the best choice, uses a singular pronoun, its, to refer to
the singular antecedent The gyrfalcon, and it properly uses
the construction its numbers are now ... greater than. In B,
the construction its numbers are ... more is not idiomatic:
there are more birds, but not more numbers.