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

Redeem

hi! parallelism! pl. explain.

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:18 pm
Thanked: 4 times

hi! parallelism! pl. explain.

by ansumania » Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:07 pm
format 1- she argues that the agency acts with reckless abandon and with disregard for human life.

format 2- many teachers choose to seek employment in the suburbs rather than face low salaries in the city.

format 3-they contended that the committee was biased and that it should be disbanded.

In format 1 and 3, we have "with" and "that" on both sides of the parallelism marker respectively but in format 2 , we don't have "to" on both sides.

This is confusing.

How will you be always sure whether you should repeat the word or not in order to maintain parallelism?

Pl. explain.

regards,

Ansuman
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:06 pm
Thanked: 7 times

by pops » Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:04 pm
Even I suffer from the same doubt :(

Thanks for asking buddy....
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:18 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by ansumania » Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:07 am
hi,

will someone pl. help on this!

thanks

Ansuman
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 8:31 pm
Thanked: 128 times
Followed by:7 members

by grockit_andrea » Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:14 am
Either one is fine. The only thing that ISN'T ok is using "to" or "that" or a similar word on, for instance, two out of three. Think of it like the distributive property:

I am going to walk, run, and jump in the park.

Here, the "to" applies to all three verbs, like this:

to(walk, run, and jump)

But the sentence would still be correct if we said

I am going to walk, to run, and to jump in the park.

The sentence would NOT be correct if we said

I am going to walk, run, and to jump in the park.

Just as with math, you can say that 2(x + y + z) is the same thing as 2x + 2y + 2z, but you would not say it's the same thing as 2x + y + 2z.

Hope this helps!
Andrea A.
Grockit Tutor
https://www.grockit.com
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:04 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by subgeeth » Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:16 am
Hi guys,

I think u have read MGMAT SC this is my reasoning why to is not used in the sentence

under llelism structures:

Verb infinitives: I decided to swim across the river rather than sail around the world :( the second to is optional) with infinitives

This is the rule usage of infinitive either must be llel by all members of a series or by only first member

hope this helps
Still working on my dreams best part is I have not achieved one yet !!!!!
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:18 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by ansumania » Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:36 am
hi Subgeeth,

then , will you please confirm this?

I decided to swim across the river rather than to sail around the world .

is this correct? just want to be sure..

thanks ,

Ansuman
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:04 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by subgeeth » Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:14 am
yes this is also correct the second to is optional we can use it but is not necessary to use
without to is also correct
Still working on my dreams best part is I have not achieved one yet !!!!!
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1