English Grammar & Syntax Quiz: Avoiding Faulty Comparisons
10 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Avoiding Faulty ComparisonsQuestion 1 of 10

A regional report states: The revenue generated by the East Branch was higher than any other branch in the network.

Which revision most clearly corrects the faulty comparison while preserving the intended meaning?

The East Branch's revenue was higher than any branch elsewhere in the network.
The East Branch's revenue was higher than that of any other branch in the network.
The East Branch was higher in revenue than that of every branch in the network.
The revenue from the East Branch was higher than the other branches in the network.
← Back to quizzes

English Grammar & Syntax Quiz

English Grammar & Syntax Quiz: Avoiding Faulty Comparisons

Practice Avoiding Faulty Comparisons in English Grammar & Syntax with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Avoiding Faulty Comparisons, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for English Grammar & Syntax.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

A regional report states: The revenue generated by the East Branch was higher than any other branch in the network.

Which revision most clearly corrects the faulty comparison while preserving the intended meaning?

  1. The East Branch's revenue was higher than any branch elsewhere in the network.
  2. The East Branch's revenue was higher than that of any other branch in the network. (correct answer)
  3. The East Branch was higher in revenue than that of every branch in the network.
  4. The revenue from the East Branch was higher than the other branches in the network.
Explanation: When a sentence compares one item to a group it belongs to, you need two things: a word like "other" or "else" to exclude the item from its own group, and parallel structure so you're comparing the same type of thing to itself (revenue to revenue, not revenue to a branch). The original sentence fails on both counts — it compares the East Branch's revenue to "any branch," which illogically includes the East Branch itself, and it compares revenue (a figure) to branches (physical entities). Choice B fixes both problems cleanly. "Any other branch" properly excludes the East Branch from the comparison group, and "that of" stands in for "the revenue of," ensuring you're comparing revenue to revenue. This is the correct answer. Choice A uses "any branch elsewhere," which is awkward and vague — "elsewhere" doesn't logically exclude the East Branch the way "other" does, and it still lacks the pronoun "that" needed to make the comparison parallel. Choice C creates a mixed comparison by saying the East Branch (an entity) "was higher in revenue than that of every branch" — "that of" now refers back to the branch, not its revenue, making the comparison structurally scrambled. Choice D drops "other" entirely, meaning the East Branch is being compared to a group that includes itself — a classic illogical comparison error. It also compares "revenue" to "branches," not revenue to revenue. A useful tip: whenever you see a comparison sentence, ask yourself two questions — Are we comparing like to like? and Does the original item need "other" or "else" to be excluded from its own group? Both must be satisfied for a comparison to be logically sound.

Question 2

The writer intends to say that Maya admires Toni Morrison more than Maya's professor admires Toni Morrison.

Which sentence expresses the intended comparison most clearly?

  1. Maya admires Toni Morrison more than she admires her own professor.
  2. Maya admires Toni Morrison more than her professor does. (correct answer)
  3. Compared with her professor, Maya admires Toni Morrison more strongly.
  4. Maya's professor admires Toni Morrison less than Maya herself.
Explanation: When a sentence makes a comparison, every element of that comparison must be unambiguous. The key question to ask yourself is: who or what is being compared to whom? Faulty comparisons arise when the sentence's structure allows more than one interpretation of the compared parties. Choice B — "Maya admires Toni Morrison more than her professor does" — is the clearest expression because the verb "does" stands in for "admires Toni Morrison," making the parallel explicit: Maya's admiration versus her professor's admiration. There's no room for confusion about what is being measured against what. Choice A is the most tempting trap. "Maya admires Toni Morrison more than she admires her own professor" completely changes the meaning — it now compares Maya's feelings toward Toni Morrison against Maya's feelings toward her professor, not against her professor's feelings toward Morrison. This is a classic meaning-shift error. Choice C — "Compared with her professor, Maya admires Toni Morrison more strongly" — is grammatically awkward and ambiguous. The phrase "compared with her professor" dangles without clearly establishing what about the professor is being compared. It also subtly implies Maya and her professor are being compared as people rather than in terms of their admiration. Choice D reverses the subject order and uses passive-leaning phrasing ("less than Maya herself"), which is clunky and harder to process than a direct construction. Clarity suffers when the main subject of the intended idea — Maya — isn't leading the sentence. Your strategy: whenever a comparison involves pronouns, mentally substitute a full noun phrase and check whether the sentence still says what you intend. If ambiguity creeps in, the sentence needs restructuring.

Question 3

For students living east of the river, walking to the laboratory generally requires less time than waiting for and riding the campus shuttle.

Which sentence presents this comparison most logically?

  1. For those students, walking to the laboratory is quicker than waiting for and riding the campus shuttle. (correct answer)
  2. For those students, walking to the laboratory is quicker than the campus shuttle they might ride.
  3. Those students walk to the laboratory more quickly than waiting for the campus shuttle.
  4. The time required for those students to walk is quicker than riding the campus shuttle.
Explanation: When a sentence makes a comparison, both sides of that comparison must be grammatically and logically parallel — meaning you're comparing the same type of thing to the same type of thing. This is called parallel structure, and it's one of the most commonly tested concepts in grammar and syntax questions. In the original passage, the comparison is between two activities: walking to the laboratory versus waiting for and riding the campus shuttle. Both sides are gerund phrases (verb+-ing), making the comparison logical and balanced. Your job is to find which answer choice preserves that same logical, parallel structure. Choice A does this correctly — it compares walking to the laboratory with waiting for and riding the campus shuttle, keeping both sides as parallel activities. This is your answer. Choice B breaks parallelism by comparing walking to the laboratory with the campus shuttle they might ride — a gerund phrase versus a noun phrase. You're essentially saying "walking is quicker than a shuttle," which isn't a logical apples-to-apples comparison. Choice C contains a subject-verb mismatch in the comparison: those students walk is compared to waiting for the campus shuttle, mixing a full clause with a gerund phrase. The two sides don't align grammatically or logically. Choice D goes further off track by saying the time required... is quicker — but time cannot be "quick" or "slow"; people and actions can. This is a faulty predicate error, and it also compares time to riding, which are different types of things entirely. The strategy to remember: whenever you spot a comparison in a sentence, ask yourself, "Am I comparing like to like?" Parallel structure means matching the grammatical form on both sides of "than" or "as."

Question 4

The editor cared equally about two goals: reducing jargon and improving clarity.

Which sentence expresses this equal comparison with parallel grammatical structure?

  1. The editor was as interested in reducing jargon as in improving the manuscript's clarity. (correct answer)
  2. The editor was as interested in reducing jargon as improving the manuscript's clarity.
  3. The editor was as interested in jargon reduction as to improve the manuscript's clarity.
  4. The editor's interest in reducing jargon was as strong as improving the manuscript's clarity.
Explanation: When a sentence uses the construction "as [adjective] as" to express equal comparison, everything that follows each "as" must be grammatically parallel — meaning the same part of speech or phrase type must appear on both sides of the comparison. Here, the editor's two goals involve actions — reducing jargon and improving clarity — so both sides of the comparison should use the same grammatical form to represent those actions. Answer A is correct because it completes the comparison with two parallel prepositional phrases: "as interested in reducing jargon as in improving the manuscript's clarity." The preposition "in" appears before both gerund phrases, making the structure perfectly balanced and unambiguous. Answer B looks almost identical to A, but it drops the second "in," leaving you with "as interested in reducing jargon as improving the manuscript's clarity." Without that second preposition, the two sides of the comparison are no longer parallel — one is a prepositional phrase, the other a bare gerund phrase. This is the most seductive trap on this question. Answer C mixes a prepositional phrase ("in jargon reduction") with an infinitive phrase ("to improve"), breaking parallelism entirely. Mixing phrase types is a classic parallelism error. Answer D shifts the subject mid-comparison: it compares "the editor's interest" with "improving the manuscript's clarity," which means you're comparing a noun to an action — an illogical and ungrammatical comparison. A useful rule of thumb: in "as...as" comparisons, whatever grammatical structure follows the first "as" must be mirrored exactly after the second "as." If you see a preposition on one side, look for it on the other.

Question 5

Leah began working at the clinic in 2018, whereas the speaker began working there in 2021.

Which sentence most clearly compares the two people's lengths of employment?

  1. Leah has worked at the clinic longer than she has worked there with me.
  2. Leah's employment at the clinic has been longer than me.
  3. Leah has worked at the clinic longer than I have. (correct answer)
  4. Compared with my employment at the clinic, Leah has worked there longer.
Explanation: When comparing two people's actions or qualities, you need to make sure both sides of the comparison are grammatically parallel — meaning the sentence compares equivalent things (a person to a person, an action to an action). Questions like this test whether you recognize faulty comparisons and pronoun case errors. Option C is the clearest and most correct sentence. "Leah has worked at the clinic longer than I have" completes the comparison properly: Leah's duration of employment is being compared to the speaker's duration of employment. The word "have" at the end implies "have worked," making both sides of the comparison parallel and complete. Looking at the distractors: A is awkward and redundant — saying "longer than she has worked there with me" changes the meaning entirely, implying the comparison is about time spent together rather than total employment length. B commits a classic faulty comparison error: it compares "Leah's employment" (a thing) to "me" (a person). Grammatically, you can only compare equivalent categories — employment to employment, not employment to a person. D is similarly flawed in structure. Although it attempts to frame the comparison, "Compared with my employment at the clinic, Leah has worked there longer" is a dangling construction — the subject of the main clause ("Leah") doesn't logically follow from "my employment." A useful rule of thumb: whenever you see a comparison, mentally check that both sides match in type. Ask yourself, "Am I comparing a person to a person, or a thing to a thing?" Mixing categories — like comparing someone's employment to a person — is one of the most common traps on grammar exams.

Question 6

After a redesign, an online course had a higher completion rate than every other online course offered by the institution.

Which sentence accurately expresses this comparison?

  1. The redesigned course's completion rate exceeded every other online course offered by the institution.
  2. The redesigned course's completion rate exceeded that of any online course offered by the institution.
  3. The redesigned course's completion exceeded the rate of every other online course at the institution.
  4. The redesigned course's completion rate exceeded that of every other online course offered by the institution. (correct answer)
Explanation: When comparing one item to others in a group, two rules must work together: logical comparison (you must compare like things to like things) and correct scope (you must properly exclude the item being compared from the group it's being compared against). The redesigned course's completion rate must be compared to the completion rates of other courses — not to the courses themselves. This is the "apples to apples" principle. The word that serves as a pronoun standing in for "completion rate," allowing you to avoid awkward repetition while keeping the comparison grammatically parallel. Answer D does both things correctly: it uses that to represent the completion rate of other courses, and it uses every other to properly exclude the redesigned course from the comparison group. This makes D the correct answer. Answer A fails the logical comparison test — it compares a completion rate directly to every other online course, mixing an abstract measure with physical things. Answer B uses that correctly but omits the word other, which creates a logical contradiction: the redesigned course would be compared against any online course offered, meaning it's being compared against itself as well. Answer C attempts a workaround by using completion without rate, breaking the parallel entirely — now you're comparing an action to a rate, which is also an apples-to-oranges error. A helpful pattern to memorize: whenever a comparison involves a possessive or a measurement (rate, price, size), ask yourself whether you've used that/those as a stand-in and whether other properly excludes the subject from its own comparison group.

Question 7

Laboratory records show that 840 samples were processed in April and 690 samples were processed in March.

Which sentence makes the comparison between the two months grammatically and logically complete?

  1. The laboratory's number of processed samples was greater in April than March.
  2. April's laboratory processed a greater number of samples than March's laboratory.
  3. The number of samples processed in April was greater than March at the laboratory.
  4. The number of samples processed in April was greater than the number processed in March. (correct answer)
Explanation: When comparing two quantities in English, grammar requires that you compare like to like — the same type of thing on both sides of the comparison. This concept, called parallel comparison, is one of the most commonly tested syntax rules. Ask yourself: is the thing on the left side of "than" the same kind of thing as what's on the right? Option D handles this correctly. It compares "the number of samples processed in April" to "the number processed in March" — a quantity to a quantity, structured identically on both sides. This is your grammatically and logically complete comparison. Now look at why the other options fail. A compares "the laboratory's number of processed samples" to "March" — a number versus a month. That's an apples-to-oranges mismatch. B introduces a different logical error: it implies April and March each have their own separate laboratory ("April's laboratory," "March's laboratory"), which is nonsensical — there is one laboratory, and you're comparing time periods. C compares "the number of samples processed in April" to "March at the laboratory" — again, a number versus a month, the same illogical mismatch as A, just repositioned. A quick strategy to catch these errors: after writing or reading a comparison, mentally strip it down to its bare bones — "[X] was greater than [Y]" — and ask whether X and Y are genuinely the same type of thing. If one side is a number and the other is a month or place, the comparison is broken and needs revision.

Question 8

Nadia's proposal was one of twelve proposals submitted to the committee.

Which sentence makes a logically valid comparison?

  1. Nadia's proposal was more detailed than any proposal submitted to the committee.
  2. Nadia's proposal was more detailed than all proposals submitted by the committee.
  3. Nadia's proposal was more detailed than any other proposal submitted to the committee. (correct answer)
  4. Nadia's proposal contained more detail compared with every proposal of the committee.
Explanation: When comparing one item to others in a group it belongs to, English grammar requires you to logically exclude the item from the group it's being compared against. If you say something is "better than any X," you're accidentally including itself in the comparison, which creates a logical contradiction — something can't be better than itself. Choice C gets this exactly right: "more detailed than any other proposal" properly excludes Nadia's proposal from the group being compared. Since there were twelve total proposals, Nadia's is being measured against the remaining eleven — a logically sound comparison. Choice A omits the word "other," so the sentence claims Nadia's proposal was more detailed than every proposal submitted, which would include Nadia's own proposal. That's a self-defeating contradiction and the most common trap on this type of question. Choice B has two problems: it still lacks "other," and it changes "to" to "by" — the committee received proposals, it didn't submit them, so "submitted by the committee" misrepresents the passage entirely. Choice D is awkward and illogical. "Compared with every proposal of the committee" is a non-standard construction, and again, comparing against every proposal includes Nadia's own, creating the same self-reference error as A. A quick tip to remember: whenever you see a comparison where the subject belongs to the group it's being compared against, look for the word "other" (or "else" for pronouns). If it's missing, the sentence is logically flawed. Spotting "any proposal" vs. "any other proposal" is often the entire test.

Question 9

The first field study gathered data through mailed surveys. The second field study gathered data through face-to-face interviews.

Which sentence compares the two studies without creating a faulty comparison?

  1. Unlike the first field study, researchers in the second study conducted face-to-face interviews.
  2. Unlike the first field study, the second field study gathered data through face-to-face interviews. (correct answer)
  3. Unlike the mailed surveys, the second field study's researchers conducted face-to-face interviews.
  4. Unlike researchers conducting interviews, the first field study relied primarily on mailed surveys.
Explanation: When a sentence uses "unlike" to draw a contrast, you must ensure the two things being compared are grammatically and logically parallel — meaning they belong to the same category. This is called a faulty comparison, and it's one of the most commonly tested errors in grammar and syntax. In the original passage, the two subjects being contrasted are the first field study and the second field study. Any correct comparison must hold those two things — both studies — side by side. Choice B does exactly this: "Unlike the first field study, the second field study gathered data through face-to-face interviews." Study is compared to study. The structure is clean, parallel, and logically sound. Choice A commits a classic faulty comparison: it contrasts "the first field study" (a study) with "researchers in the second study" (people). A study cannot be meaningfully or logically compared to researchers — they are different categories of things. Choice C makes a similar error by comparing "the mailed surveys" (a method) to "the second field study's researchers" (people) — again, mismatched categories. Choice D compounds the problem by flipping the structure entirely, comparing "researchers conducting interviews" to "the first field study," which mixes people with a study and muddies the intended contrast. A reliable strategy: whenever you see "unlike" at the start of a sentence, immediately identify what noun follows it, then check what noun comes after the comma. Ask yourself — are these the same type of thing? If a study opens the sentence, a study must follow the comma. If the categories don't match, the comparison is faulty.

Question 10

An evaluator is comparing the encryption methods used by one platform with the encryption methods used by competing platforms.

Which sentence states the comparison correctly and unambiguously?

  1. The platform's encryption methods are more sophisticated than its leading competitors.
  2. The platform's encryption methods are more sophisticated than those used by its leading competitors. (correct answer)
  3. The platform's encryption methods show more sophistication compared with its leading competitors.
  4. The platform itself is more sophisticated in encryption than the methods its leading competitors use.
Explanation: When comparing two things in a sentence, both items being compared must be grammatically parallel — that is, you must compare like with like. This question tests whether you can spot faulty comparisons, one of the most common traps in grammar and editing exams. The passage establishes that the comparison is between encryption methods (of one platform) and encryption methods (of competitors). Choice B correctly maintains this parallel structure: "the platform's encryption methods are more sophisticated than those used by its leading competitors." The word those is a pronoun standing in for "encryption methods," so you're comparing methods to methods — a clean, unambiguous parallel. Choice A fails because it compares "encryption methods" to "its leading competitors" — methods versus entire companies. That's comparing apples to oranges. Choice C makes the same error: it compares "encryption methods" directly to "its leading competitors," swapping companies in where methods should appear. Choice D is grammatically awkward and confusing — it shifts the subject to "the platform itself" and then tangles the comparison by mentioning "the methods its leading competitors use" in a trailing clause, making it unclear exactly what is being measured against what. A useful strategy: whenever you see a comparative sentence (using more, less, better, worse, etc.), ask yourself, "What two things are actually being compared?" Write them out mentally and check that they're the same type of thing. If a sentence compares a method to a company, or a policy to a person, it's committing a faulty comparison — and choice B avoids exactly that error.