An Unparalleled Letdown
The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation
An Unparalleled Letdown
Bad grammar weakens good writing, but some bad writing is grammatically flawless. Today we’ll discuss parallel structure and show how faulty parallelism can ruin a sentence without breaking any rules of grammar.
Self-editing is part of writing. We could write I wrote the letter. I signed the letter. I sent the letter. But we discover at an early age that we don’t need three sentences. Instead, we compress the information into one sentence: I wrote, signed, and sent the letter.
That’s where parallelism comes in. When two or more elements (wrote, signed, sent) are given equal consideration in the context of a sentence, they should be as similar as possible: wrote, signed, and sent are all active verbs in the past tense, giving the sentence parallel structure. That is what makes I wrote, signed, and sent the letter simple, direct, and clear.
Now consider this rickety sentence: She lost her agent, publisher, and her books weren’t selling. That’s like saying She lost A, B, and 3; what happened to C? This is verbal bait-and-switch. The reader expects another noun after agent and publisher, and feels cheated when the third element is a clause instead. Why not rewrite the sentence with two independent clauses: She lost her agent and publisher, and her books weren’t selling.
A different kind of faulty parallelism: On my vacation, I want to sit back, relax, and to have fun. To keep things parallel, either remove the second to and say I want to sit back, relax, and have fun, or put to in front of all the verbs: I want to sit back, to relax, and to have fun.
Here’s a mistake you see all the time: DeWayne is as smart or smarter than Hank. Did you catch it? As it stands, the sentence states DeWayne is as smart than Hank, or smarter. Make it DeWayne is as smart as or smarter than Hank.
We close with this monstrosity: “The five-bedroom estate home features distinct architectural finishes, wraparound terraces with eastern- and western-facing views, and is near downtown Lafayette.”
The writer has us anticipating a third noun to go with “finishes” and “terraces.” So how about something like “and an ideal location just minutes from downtown Lafayette.” When we read instead the feeble “and is near downtown Lafayette,” we almost feel betrayed.
Pop Quiz
See if you can fix these sentences’ faulty parallelism.
1. I have earned two degrees, entered the health care field, and have lost forty pounds.
2. I wasn’t informed or interested in the offer.
3. Juanita is proud of her painting and how well she writes.
Pop Quiz Answers
1. I have earned two degrees, entered the health care field, and lost forty pounds. (OR have earned, have entered, have lost)
2. I wasn’t informed about or interested in the offer. (OR I wasn’t informed of or interested in the offer.)
3. Juanita is proud of her painting and her writing. (OR She is proud of how well she paints and writes.)
If the article or the existing discussions do not address a thought or question you have on the subject, please use the "Comment" box at the bottom of this page.
I have a question concerning the quiz for this topic. For the first quiz item, why are the “haves” required at all? The word seems unnecessary.
My solution was:
1. I earned two degrees, entered the health care field, and lost forty pounds.
Our quizzes feature everyday sentences our readers might come across in books, magazines, correspondence, etc. Without context, how can anyone say a helping verb such as have is unnecessary in such a sentence?
I feel that the following sentence needs a small correction to achieve the parallel structure:
So when you are trying to persuade someone to change their mind about something or adopt your view, you will go further than expressing your opinion.
I believe that there must be a “to” before “adopt”, but I cannot prove it. Am I right? Thank you in advance.
Your sentence includes three understood infinitive phrases:
So when you are trying [to persuade someone] [to change their mind about something] or [to adopt your view], you will go further than expressing your opinion.
The structure of the sentence indicates that the first infinitive phrase, “to persuade someone,” governs the following two; “to adopt your view” would not stand alone. In other words, we would not write “So when you are trying to adopt your view…”
Whether to include or omit the second following “to” (before “adopt”) would be a matter of writer’s style and preference. Including it would not change the meaning, and some writers might view the inclusion as a superfluous extra word.