BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Parallelism + ECLIPSE Understanding Through Analogies

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:02 am
Thanked: 3 times

Parallelism + ECLIPSE Understanding Through Analogies

by towerSpider » Wed Jan 19, 2011 2:34 am
Lets make it into simple analogy for
understanding.
(1)I would prefer to love Juli, rather
than Sonia. (i think this one is wrong
because rather than is used for
preferences but here, we have two
nouns : Juli, and sonia. Though
". . . .juli, not sonia. . ." will be correct.
Other reason is that in this situation
you are loving both. What if you
have preference for loving juli over
killing juli. in such cases you just can
not skip verb because verbs are
different.)
(2)I would prefer to love Juli, rather
than love Sonia.
(3)I would prefer to love Juli, rather
that to love Sonia.
Now my question is why choose (3)
over (2) even thugi (2) is concise?
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:45 pm
Location: Boston
Thanked: 20 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:720

by stormier » Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:35 am
towerSpider wrote:Lets make it into simple analogy for
understanding.
(1)I would prefer to love Juli, rather
than Sonia. (i think this one is wrong
because rather than is used for
preferences but here, we have two
nouns : Juli, and sonia. Though
". . . .juli, not sonia. . ." will be correct.
Other reason is that in this situation
you are loving both. What if you
have preference for loving juli over
killing juli. in such cases you just can
not skip verb because verbs are
different.)
(2)I would prefer to love Juli, rather
than love Sonia.
(3)I would prefer to love Juli, rather
that to love Sonia.
Now my question is why choose (3)
over (2) even thugi (2) is concise?

Hi - very interesting question. Although not an expert, here's my 2 cents.

I love to play rather than (to) study. Both with and without to the sentence is grammatically correct, and the one without to would be more concise.

However the question that you pose is that of an idiom.

prefer X to Y

where X and Y are nouns (? is this correct - experts ? can X or Y be something other than noun ?)

option (2) I would prefer (to love juli, rather than) (love sonia) - the to used for comparison between the two nouns, X and Y, is missing.

option (3) I would prefer (to love juli, rather than) to ([to] love sonia). the [to] is implied as in the play vs study example above. The to, according to me, serves the purpose of comparison required in the idiom prefer X to Y. The purpose of to in option (3) is NOT to create parallelism between "to love Juli" and "to love Sonia". "To love Juli" and "love Sonia" are parallel.

Experts please weigh in.
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1