shoot4greatness wrote:Hi ya'll i was going through mgmat sc book and I ran into a little stumble. In pararllel elements section, mgmat says

"We would like not only to hear your side of the story but also to provide a response. "

However, down the page, it says

"They wanted to increase awareness, spark interest, and motivate purchases."

I don't quite understand why "to" was absent in front of "spark" and "motivate". Can anyone make it more clear?

I believe both sentence structure is different.
1. Not only x but also Y.
2. List : in list in order to avoid redundancy you can have "to" only at the 1st item of list. But even if "to" with all item in list sentence is grammatically correct.

The only way I reasoned myself out is by breaking down the sentence into parts and subparts i.e. x,y,and z. So here goes.

1. "We would like not to hear your side of the story but also to provide a response."

The parallel markers are "not only" and "but also". Thus, the sentence would be broken down to:

"We would like [not only to hear your side of the story but also to provide a response.]"

This will be same as "not only x, but also y". x and y must be parallel. Thus, "to" must be included before each verbs.

2. "They wanted to increase awareness, spark interest, and motivate purchase."

The parallel marker in this sentence is "and" only. Thus the sentence would be broken down to:

"They wanted to [increase awareness, spark interest, and motivate purchase.]"

This will be same as "They want to x, y, and z." Thus, "to" is not necessary to be in front of each verbs.

One more good example of breaking down the sentence for me was this:

3. "I want to retire to a place where I can be relax and where the taxes are low."

The only parallel marker is "and". This will be same as:

"I want to retire to a place [where I can relax and where the taxes are low.]"

x and y.

Thus for parallel construction, "where" is necessary in front of each clause.

What do you guys think of my reasoning?[/i]