Parallelism - I do not see the hard fact rules!?

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:42 pm
Hello forum,

I am about to learn the SC section with the help of the MGMAT book. A problem that I face is, that in the beginning it seems that for every GMAT SC question there will be a rule how to solve this. With "rule" I mean a hard fact thing (if x = y and y=z, then x=z). But today with solving the following sentenced it often feels like it is more of an "experience" thing, or something you need to "feel".

Today I studied chapter 4 "Parallelism" and came across some sentences:

For example this one:
Sal applied himself in his new job, arriving early every day, skipping lunch regularly, and leaving late every night.
It says that this sentence is correct, even though the first phrase "Sal applied himself" is not parallel to the two participle phrases "skipping" and "leaving". The reason is that the first sentence is somehow the main clause and kind of "superior" to the other two.

So please, can somebody explain this? I mean, I understand the explanation, but how can this be a "hard" rule?? For non-native speaker this is more an understanding problem and hearing is some parts of the sentence are superior/inferior to others....


Another question with Parallelism is, where do I know WHAT I have to make parallel. In the book it says it can be almost everything (from verbs, to adjectives, to whole phrases etc.).
So I came across this sentence which I could not solve:
The students did poorly on the test more because they had not studied than the material was difficult.
How can I know that the word "because" needs to be made parallel and not for example "because + subject"?
Correct sentence: The students did poorly on the test more because they had not studied than because the material was difficult.

Tobacco companies, shaken by a string of legal setback in the US, but which retain strong growth prospects in the developing world, face an uncertain future.
Where do I know that I have to modify the phrase "shaken by a string" in this particular way: "which have been shaken by a string"? And not for example in this way: "which were shaken by a string"? The corresponding phrase is "which retain strong growth prospects", but where do I see that I need to include a "have been"? I cannot see it in the corresponding phrase...

Sorry that my questions are poorly written. I am a non-native and this parallelism thing drives me mad :/

Any answers and explanations (for dummies pls) are much appreciated :)

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 768
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:18 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA
Thanked: 387 times
Followed by:140 members

by Mike@Magoosh » Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:25 am
Dear 123nobody321,
I'm happy to help. :-)

Parallelism is very hard. One of the reasons it is hard is that any grammatical structure (noun, verb, adjective, prepositional phrase, participial phrase, infinitive phrase, subordinate clause, etc. etc.) can be in parallel to another of the same thing. A deeper reason it is hard is because, fundamentally, parallelism is not simply about grammar but about meaning. In general, on GMAT SC, folks fixate on the grammar and neglect how important meaning is. It's not that grammar is unimportant, but grammar serves meaning, not the other way around. Grammar often has rules, but meaning is much harder to isolate, to capture, in rules. Beware of trying to make the GMAT SC too rule-based and mathematical --- the GMAT punishes people who fall too much into that approach.

For example, think about this first sentence you cited:
Sal applied himself in his new job, arriving early every day, skipping lunch regularly, and leaving late every night.
Yes, the violet part is the main clause, and is, in your words, "superior" to the green phrases which follow. Why? Logic & meaning. Applying oneself in a job is a general category, an overarching collection of behaviors, whereas the green phrases list specific behaviors that fall into this category. There's no simple "rule" here --- you must engage with the meaning.

Here are a few blogs on parallelism that may help you.
(a) https://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/parallelis ... orrection/
(b) https://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-paral ... ce-inside/
(c) https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-sente ... rallelism/
(d) https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... rb-tenses/

That second blog does address a rule that is relevant to the error in the second sentence you cited ("The students did poorly on the test ...." The fourth one addresses an issue with the third sentence ("Tobacco companies, shaken by a string of legal setbacks ...)

I appreciate that parallelism is particular difficult for someone still in the process of getting comfortable with English. Here's my advice. Yes, by all means, study the MGMAT books: they are wonderful. BUT, that will not be enough for you. You need to do the hard work of getting yourself more and more comfortable with English. Over and above any GMAT practice, I recommend that also read English for an hour a day. Here are some recommendations for what to read:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-reading-list/
In particular, as you read, search for parallelism, for the many ways that parallelism can show up. If you are unsure about any sentence you read in one of those sources, type it up and post it here, asking the experts to explain the parallelism.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
https://gmat.magoosh.com/