Q. Choose the wrong sentence in the following sentences.
- Deep-sea habitats are as varied as those on land.
- Writing a novel is two times as difficult as I think.
- He looks three times as happy as I had seen.
- I love her as much as you.
- Several excuses are always less convincing than one.
I think option #3, "He looks three times as happy as I had seen", is probably, or should be, the "wrong sentence".
For it seems to be missing the 2nd time reference point in its comparison of when he looked happy. The other four options appear to be fine.
LONG VERSION:
Here I'll go and explain a bit more why the individual options seem to be okay or not.
Option #1. Deep-sea habitats are as varied as those on land.
This appears to be fine. Two terms are being compared: "the variety of deep-sea habitats" versus "the variety of land habitats".
Option #2. Writing a novel is two times as difficult as I think.
This appears to be fine. Two terms are being compared: "the (actual) difficulty in writing a novel" versus "the difficulty that I think it takes to write a novel".
A possible context:
- If I was a young writer, I might think that I ought to be able to easily write a sci-fi novel in a year, but my parents might shake their heads in disagreement and say that that would take two years at least. And so, when I talk to a friend about this, I might say to that friend, "Writing a novel is two times as difficult as I think. That's what my parents keep telling me."
As a standalone sentence, option #2's sentence works too: the actual writing of a novel is X difficult, and I think writing a novel is Y difficult, and X is equal to 2Y.
Option #3. He looks three times as happy as I had seen.
This one seems to be malformed. And it seems to be the most awkward of all the options in the list.
Its problem seems to be that it doesn't mention within the second term (the comparative clause) a 2nd time that is being compared against. The 1st time that is being used in the comparison could be now, as in "He now looks happy", but there is no 2nd time of when he looked happy which could be used in the comparison. That is, in other words: He now (at time #1) looks X happy, and he used to (at time #2) look Y happy, and X is equal to 3Y -- but there is no mentioning of when that time #2 was.
Option #3's sentence could be tweaked into something that could work, such as "He looks three times as happy as when I had seen him last."
Option #4. I love her as much as you.
This appears to be fine, but perhaps it could be ambiguous as to how it should be interpreted, and context will probably disambiguate it. It could possibly be interpreted in two ways. One (1st) interpretation is,
- I love her as much as you do.
where the two terms are: "I love her" vs "You love her". Another possible (2nd) interpretation is,
- I love her as much as I love you.
where the two terms are: "I love her" vs "I love you". This 2nd interpretation of option #4 is structured similar to,
- "I love cookies as much as cupcakes."
Aside: Sometimes comparative constructions can be full of ambiguity, e.g. "She phoned Angela more often than Liz", which can be interpreted with the 2nd term being either "she phoned Liz" or as "Liz phoned her". (Example borrowed from CGEL page 1112, [20.v])
Option #5. Several excuses are always less convincing than one.
This appears to be fine. Two terms are being compared: "the convincing power of several excuses" versus "the convincing power of one excuse".
The Samsung Galaxy J1 is a decent entry-level device that, just like all of its peers, will be made or broken by its pricing.
It's a reference to the idiom "make-or-break". The meaning is: the pricing of the new model will be the crucial factor that will either make it a hit or lead to its failure on the market.
It's an entry level device, hence probably cheap. A low price might attract buyers, but a low price is often associated with a lack of features. This could discourage those who prefer buying more expensive and feature-packed products.
If a company makes a device that is poor in features but fails to make the price low enough, consumers will consider the deal a rip-off and won't buy the item. This is especially important because those who buy entry-level phones are more sensitive to pricing than those who buy expensive phones. You've got to make your pricing just right.
The "make-or-break" idiom is often used in the media:
Careers are made or broken by the way political leaders handle the kind of crises over which they ultimately have no control. (Boston Herald)
Unions could make or break Hollande reforms. (Reuters)
In his view there are two things that make or break a film — casting and editing — and he takes time with both. (Economic Times)
It's used in the passive voice, although not very often:
Manchester United's season will be made or broken by the performance of newly appointed manager, Louis Van Gaal. (The Telegraph)
"In the future, superpowers will be made or broken based on the strength of their cryptanalytic programs," says one document. (Inquirer)
Best Answer
Both of your versions are correct and mean exactly the same thing. The person telling you the first one is wrong is probably thinking of a different circumstance. Suppose instead of "7/4 times" you had said 175%, then you could say "75% faster" but still you would say "175% times as fast" (except nobody actually uses that phrasing, so it would confuse people). And note that your way (either phrasing) is better because it is unambiguous. Anyway, I'd guess that the person saying the first one is wrong is thinking of that circumstance and thinking you should say "3/7 faster" but again, with your inclusion of 'times' that is not the case.