English Grammar & Syntax Quiz: Revising For Parallel Lists
10 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Revising For Parallel ListsQuestion 1 of 10

Which revision of the bold text makes the three issues examined by the review grammatically parallel?

The review asks how carefully researchers documented exclusions, whether their estimates were reproducible, and the clarity with which they acknowledged uncertainty.

about careful documentation of exclusions, whether estimates were reproducible, and clearly acknowledging uncertainty
how carefully exclusions were documented, the reproducibility of estimates, and how clearly uncertainty was acknowledged
about documenting exclusions carefully, reproducing estimates consistently, and the clarity of acknowledged uncertainty
how carefully researchers documented exclusions, whether their estimates were reproducible, and how clearly they acknowledged uncertainty
← Back to quizzes

English Grammar & Syntax Quiz

English Grammar & Syntax Quiz: Revising For Parallel Lists

Practice Revising For Parallel Lists in English Grammar & Syntax with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Revising For Parallel Lists, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for English Grammar & Syntax.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

Which revision of the bold text makes the three issues examined by the review grammatically parallel?

The review asks how carefully researchers documented exclusions, whether their estimates were reproducible, and the clarity with which they acknowledged uncertainty.

  1. about careful documentation of exclusions, whether estimates were reproducible, and clearly acknowledging uncertainty
  2. how carefully exclusions were documented, the reproducibility of estimates, and how clearly uncertainty was acknowledged
  3. about documenting exclusions carefully, reproducing estimates consistently, and the clarity of acknowledged uncertainty
  4. how carefully researchers documented exclusions, whether their estimates were reproducible, and how clearly they acknowledged uncertainty (correct answer)
Explanation: Parallelism questions test whether items in a list share the same grammatical form. When a sentence presents multiple elements joined by "and," each element must follow the same structural pattern — same part of speech, same clause type, same phrasing rhythm. Here, the sentence uses "asks" followed by three things the review examines. The key is identifying what grammatical structure each item uses. The original sentence mixes an indirect question with "how" (how carefully researchers documented), an indirect question with "whether" (whether their estimates were reproducible), and a noun phrase (the clarity with which). That third item breaks the pattern — it's a noun phrase, not an indirect question. Choice D fixes exactly that problem. It presents three parallel indirect questions: how carefully researchers documented exclusions, whether their estimates were reproducible, and how clearly they acknowledged uncertainty. All three follow the same subject-verb structure inside an indirect question, making the list grammatically consistent. D is the correct answer. Choice A breaks parallelism immediately by switching to prepositional phrases beginning with "about," which clashes with the "how/whether" structure of the first two items. Choice B mixes structures awkwardly — it opens with an indirect question, shifts to a noun phrase (the reproducibility of estimates), then returns to an indirect question, creating an inconsistent pattern. Choice C uses gerund phrases (documenting, reproducing) for the first two items but then switches to a noun phrase (the clarity of acknowledged uncertainty), again breaking the pattern at the final element. When checking parallelism, isolate each item in the list, strip it down to its core form, and ask: do all three look the same? If one item feels like a different "shape," that's your red flag.

Question 2

Which revision expresses all three reasons for the postponement as parallel noun phrases?

The project manager cited three reasons for the postponement: the soil beneath the foundation was unstable, because replacement beams had not arrived, and the need for another safety review.

  1. unstable soil beneath the foundation, replacement beams were delayed, and the need for another safety review
  2. instability in the foundation soil, because replacement beams had not arrived, and conducting another safety review
  3. unstable soil beneath the foundation, the delayed arrival of replacement beams, and the need for another safety review (correct answer)
  4. because the foundation soil was unstable, the delayed arrival of replacement beams, and another safety review was needed
Explanation: Parallelism is one of the most tested concepts in grammar and syntax, and the key to spotting it is simple: when a sentence lists multiple items, every item must follow the same grammatical structure. Here, the sentence lists three reasons after a colon, so all three must be expressed as matching noun phrases — not clauses, not prepositional detours, not gerunds mixed with nouns. Choice C accomplishes exactly this: unstable soil beneath the foundation, the delayed arrival of replacement beams, and the need for another safety review. Each item is a noun phrase built around a central noun (soil, arrival, need), with modifiers attached consistently. That's your answer. Now, let's see why the others fail. Choice A starts with a noun phrase (unstable soil beneath the foundation) but then breaks the pattern with a full independent clause (replacement beams were delayed) — switching from a phrase to a sentence mid-list. Choice B keeps the problematic subordinating conjunction "because" before the second item, which turns it into a dependent clause rather than a noun phrase, creating a structural mismatch. Choice D opens with "because," making the first item a dependent clause, and then closes with another clause (another safety review was needed) — so all three items have different structures, making it the most broken of the group. A useful strategy: when you see a list in a sentence, quickly label what grammatical form each item takes. If they don't all match, the sentence isn't parallel. Look for answer choices where every listed item starts and ends the same grammatical "type."

Question 3

Which revision most clearly presents the auditor's three conclusions in parallel form?

After examining the logs, the auditor concluded that access codes had been shared, unauthorized files were downloaded, and the deletion of several alerts.

  1. that access codes had been shared, the downloading of unauthorized files, and that several alerts had been deleted
  2. that access codes had been shared, downloading unauthorized files, and several deleted system alerts
  3. the sharing of access codes, that unauthorized files were downloaded, and deleting several system alerts
  4. that access codes had been shared, that unauthorized files had been downloaded, and that several alerts had been deleted (correct answer)
Explanation: When a sentence lists multiple items that all relate to the same verb or phrase, those items must be grammatically parallel — meaning they share the same structure. Here, the auditor "concluded" three things, so each conclusion should follow the same grammatical pattern. The clearest, most consistent structure is "that + subject + verb" for each item, since the sentence already introduces the first conclusion with that. Answer D does exactly this: "that access codes had been shared, that unauthorized files had been downloaded, and that several alerts had been deleted." Every conclusion is a complete that-clause with its own subject and past-perfect verb, creating clean, symmetrical parallelism. The original sentence and all three wrong answers mix incompatible structures. Answer A starts with a that-clause, then shifts to a gerund phrase (the downloading of unauthorized files), then returns to a that-clause — three different forms for three parallel items. Answer B similarly mixes a that-clause with a gerund phrase (downloading unauthorized files) and a loose noun phrase (several deleted system alerts), so no consistent pattern holds. Answer C abandons that-clauses entirely for its first and third items, using noun phrases (the sharing of access codes) and a gerund (deleting several system alerts), while sandwiching a lone that-clause in the middle — perhaps the most scrambled of all. Your strategy: when checking parallelism in a list, identify the grammatical form of the first item, then verify every other item matches it exactly. If one item uses that + clause, they all should.

Question 4

Which revision most effectively makes the actions in the list parallel?

The orientation is intended to help new editors identify unsupported claims, to distinguish fact from opinion, and recognizing when a source is outdated.

  1. identifying unsupported claims, distinguish fact from opinion, and recognizing when a source is outdated
  2. identify unsupported claims, distinguish fact from opinion, and recognize when a source is outdated (correct answer)
  3. identify unsupported claims, to distinguish fact from opinion, and recognition of outdated sources
  4. to identify unsupported claims, distinguishing fact from opinion, and to recognize when a source is outdated
Explanation: When a sentence contains a list of actions, every item in that list must follow the same grammatical form — this is the rule of parallel structure. Think of it like a template: once you establish the pattern with the first item, every item that follows must match it exactly. In the original sentence, the controlling verb is "help new editors," which takes bare infinitives (verbs without "to"). So the correct pattern for each list item is simply: verb + object — identify, distinguish, recognize. Choice B follows this perfectly: "identify unsupported claims, distinguish fact from opinion, and recognize when a source is outdated." Every item is a clean bare infinitive, making the list consistent and grammatically sound. B is your answer. Now let's look at why the others fail. Choice A mixes forms awkwardly — "identifying" (a gerund) doesn't match "distinguish" (bare infinitive), so the list is still broken even though it drops the "to." Choice C starts correctly with "identify" but then shifts to "recognition of outdated sources," which is a noun phrase, not a verb — that's a mismatch in both form and meaning. Choice D restores "to" before some verbs but not others ("distinguishing" is a participle), creating an inconsistent mix of three different grammatical forms in a single list. A reliable strategy: when you spot a list in a grammar question, underline the first item and ask yourself, what grammatical form is this? Then verify that every other item in the list matches that exact form. Mixing infinitives, gerunds, and noun phrases is the most common parallelism trap you'll encounter.

Question 5

Which revision makes the contents of the collection parallel noun phrases with comparable modifiers?

The archive's new collection includes letters written during the expedition, recording interviews with crew members, and photographs that local families donated.

  1. letters written during the expedition, recording interviews with crew members, and photographs donated by local families
  2. letters written during the expedition, interviews recorded with crew members, and photographs donated by local families (correct answer)
  3. writing letters during the expedition, recorded interviews with crew members, and local families donated photographs
  4. written letters from the expedition, to record interviews with crew members, and photographs donated by local families
Explanation: When a question asks you to make items in a list parallel, your job is to ensure each element follows the same grammatical pattern. Here, the question specifically asks for parallel noun phrases with comparable modifiers — meaning each item should be a noun modified in a structurally matching way. Look at the original sentence's three items: letters written during the expedition (noun + past-participial phrase), recording interviews with crew members (gerund phrase — not a noun phrase at all), and photographs that local families donated (noun + relative clause). These three don't match structurally. The goal is to rewrite all three as nouns modified by past-participial phrases (noun + past participle + details), which is the clearest, most parallel construction. Answer B achieves exactly this: letters written during the expedition, interviews recorded with crew members, and photographs donated by local families. Each item is a noun followed by a past participial modifier — perfectly parallel. Choice A keeps recording interviews with crew members, which is a gerund phrase, not a noun phrase — so the middle item still breaks the pattern. Choice C opens with writing letters, a gerund, and ends with local families donated photographs, a clause inverted into a noun stack — neither fits a noun-phrase pattern. Choice D uses written letters from the expedition (acceptable), then to record interviews (an infinitive phrase), which is a completely different structure and breaks parallelism immediately. Your strategy: when checking parallelism, label each list item by its grammatical form (gerund, infinitive, noun phrase, clause). If the labels don't all match, the sentence isn't parallel — keep revising until every item wears the same grammatical "hat."

Question 6

Which revision makes the three descriptions of the valve parallel while retaining the intended comparisons?

Engineers described the new valve as less prone to leaking, capable of being serviced without special tools, and technicians could install it more quickly.

  1. less prone to leaking, requiring no special servicing tools, and technicians can install it more quickly
  2. reducing leaks more effectively, with easier serviceability without special tools, and quicker installation for technicians
  3. less prone to leaking, more easily serviced without special tools, and allowing technicians to install it more quickly
  4. less prone to leaking, easier to service without special tools, and quicker for technicians to install (correct answer)
Explanation: When a sentence lists multiple descriptions of the same subject, those descriptions must be grammatically parallel — meaning each item follows the same structural pattern. In this sentence, the valve is being compared to something implicit ("less than other valves"), so each description should use a comparable adjective or adjective phrase that can logically follow "as." The cleanest structure uses adjective phrases: less prone to leaking, easier to service, quicker to install — each an adjective followed by an infinitive or prepositional phrase. That's exactly what D delivers. All three items are parallel adjective phrases (less prone to leaking, easier to service without special tools, quicker for technicians to install), and each preserves the original comparative meaning naturally attached to "as." A fails because the third item shifts to an independent clause ("technicians can install it more quickly"), breaking the parallel structure entirely — the same problem as the original sentence. B abandons the adjective-phrase pattern and introduces a mix of participial phrases and prepositional phrases (reducing leaks, with easier serviceability, quicker installation). The items don't share a consistent grammatical form, and "reducing leaks more effectively" subtly changes the meaning from prone to leaking to leak reduction. C is close, but the third item — allowing technicians to install it more quickly — shifts from an adjective phrase to a participial phrase, breaking the parallelism established by the first two items. Strategy tip: When checking parallelism, strip each list item down to its core grammatical form. If you can't label them all the same way (all adjective phrases, all infinitives, etc.), the list isn't parallel.

Question 7

Which revision best establishes parallel structure among the methods used by the historian?

The historian reconstructed the trade route by comparing port records, consultation with local archivists, and she examined changes in place-names.

  1. by comparing port records, consultation with local archivists, and examining changes in place-names
  2. through comparison of port records, consulting local archivists, and an examination of changes in place-names
  3. by comparing port records, consulting local archivists, and examining changes in place-names (correct answer)
  4. by comparing port records, to consult local archivists, and examining changes in place-names
Explanation: Parallel structure means that items in a series must share the same grammatical form. When a sentence lists multiple actions or methods, each item should mirror the others — same part of speech, same verb form, same construction. The original sentence fails this test: "comparing" (a gerund phrase) clashes with "consultation" (a noun) and "she examined" (a subject-verb clause). Choice C is correct because it aligns all three methods as gerund phrases introduced by "by": comparing port records, consulting local archivists, and examining changes in place-names. Each item follows the same –ing pattern, creating a clean, balanced list that flows naturally from the preposition "by." Choice A appears close but isn't quite there — it fixes the third item ("examining") while leaving "consultation" as a noun in the middle slot. That noun breaks the gerund chain, so the list still reads unevenly: comparing / consultation / examining. Choice B swaps the preposition to "through" and restructures items inconsistently: "comparison" (noun) / "consulting" (gerund) / "an examination" (noun phrase). Three different forms means three strikes. Choice D introduces an infinitive — "to consult" — sandwiched between two gerunds. Mixing an infinitive with –ing forms violates parallelism just as much as mixing nouns with verbs. A reliable strategy: when you spot a list in a sentence, underline each item and ask, "Do they all have the same grammatical shape?" If one item is a gerund, they all must be. If one is a noun, they all must be. Consistency is everything.

Question 8

Which revision correctly coordinates the program's three goals and places the correlative conjunctions around parallel elements?

The program seeks not only to recruit local volunteers but also retaining experienced staff and the preparation of new coordinators.

  1. not only to recruit local volunteers but also to retain experienced staff and to prepare new coordinators (correct answer)
  2. not only recruiting local volunteers but also to retain experienced staff and preparing new coordinators
  3. to recruit not only local volunteers but also retaining experienced staff and preparing new coordinators
  4. not only the recruitment of local volunteers but also to retain experienced staff and preparing new coordinators
Explanation: When you see correlative conjunctions like not only...but also, your job is to check that the elements they connect are grammatically parallel — meaning they share the same grammatical form. Think of the conjunctions as a frame: whatever structure follows "not only" must mirror whatever structure follows "but also." In the original sentence, "not only to recruit" (infinitive) is paired with "retaining...and the preparation of" (mixed gerund and noun phrase) — a clear parallelism breakdown. The fix requires all three goals to follow the same grammatical pattern throughout. Choice A solves this perfectly: not only to recruit...but also to retain...and to prepare — three infinitives in clean parallel sequence. The correlative conjunctions frame the entire list consistently, and all three coordinators get equal grammatical weight. This is your correct answer. Choice B fails because it mixes forms: "recruiting" (gerund) after not only, then "to retain" (infinitive) and "preparing" (gerund) after but also — three different forms with no consistency. Choice C misplaces the correlative conjunctions entirely. Positioning not only before "local volunteers" narrows the contrast to the type of volunteers rather than coordinating all three program goals — it changes the sentence's meaning and leaves "retaining" and "preparing" still dangling without parallel structure. Choice D pairs a noun phrase ("the recruitment") with an infinitive ("to retain") and a gerund ("preparing"), again mixing three different forms. Study tip: Whenever you spot not only...but also, immediately identify what grammatical form follows each conjunction and verify they match — this pattern appears frequently on grammar exams and the fix is always consistent form across every element in the list.

Question 9

Which revision makes all three qualifications for the consultant parallel?

The committee wanted a consultant who could diagnose workflow delays, with experience negotiating contracts, and able to train supervisors.

  1. who could diagnose workflow delays, with experience in contract negotiations, and who could train supervisors
  2. capable of diagnosing workflow delays, who had negotiated contracts, and able to train supervisors
  3. who could diagnose workflow delays, who had experience negotiating contracts, and who was able to train supervisors (correct answer)
  4. who could diagnose workflow delays, experienced in negotiating contracts, and who was able to train supervisors
Explanation: Whenever you see a question about parallel structure, your job is to identify the grammatical pattern used for the first item in a list and then confirm that every other item matches it exactly — same part of speech, same construction, same form. In this sentence, the committee wants a consultant with three qualifications listed after the word "consultant." The cleanest way to express three relative clauses is with the repeated structure who + verb, which signals clearly that each item describes the same noun. Answer C does exactly this: who could diagnose workflow delays, who had experience negotiating contracts, and who was able to train supervisors. All three open with "who" followed by a verb phrase — perfect parallelism. Answer A fails because the second qualification shifts to a prepositional phrase (with experience in contract negotiations) while the first and third use relative clauses with "who." Two out of three isn't parallel. Answer B breaks down immediately — the first item uses capable of + gerund, the second uses a relative clause with "who," and the third uses able to + infinitive. Three different constructions for three items is the opposite of parallelism. Answer D starts with a relative clause, then drops to a participial phrase (experienced in negotiating contracts), then returns to a relative clause — again, an inconsistent pattern that disrupts the grammatical flow. A quick strategy to use on any parallelism question: underline the connector words (and, or, but) and then work backward to identify the grammatical form of each item being joined. If the forms don't match, the sentence isn't parallel. C is the correct answer because it's the only choice where all three items are built the same way.

Question 10

Which revision of the list most effectively creates parallel structure while preserving the sentence's meaning?

The commission recommends reducing permit delays, a revision of inspection standards, and that the agency establish a public appeals process.

  1. reducing permit delays, revising inspection standards, and establishing a public appeals process (correct answer)
  2. a reduction in permit delays, revising inspection standards, and the establishment of a public appeals process
  3. to reduce permit delays, revising inspection standards, and to establish a public appeals process
  4. that permit delays be reduced, revising inspection standards, and establishing a public appeals process
Explanation: Parallel structure requires that items in a list share the same grammatical form — if one item is a gerund phrase (verb + -ing), all items should be gerund phrases. When you spot a list in a sentence, immediately check whether every element matches structurally. In the original sentence, the three list items are mismatched: "reducing permit delays" (gerund phrase), "a revision of inspection standards" (noun phrase), and "that the agency establish a public appeals process" (noun clause). Your job is to find the revision that makes all three items the same form without changing the meaning. Choice A does this perfectly: "reducing permit delays, revising inspection standards, and establishing a public appeals process" gives you three clean gerund phrases that are grammatically identical and preserve the original intent. This is your correct answer. Choice B mixes a noun phrase ("a reduction in permit delays"), a gerund ("revising inspection standards"), and another noun phrase ("the establishment of a public appeals process") — three different structures, so the parallelism still fails. Choice C attempts infinitive phrases but stumbles: "to reduce," then "revising" (a gerund, not an infinitive), then "to establish" — the middle element breaks the pattern. Choice D opens with a noun clause ("that permit delays be reduced"), then shifts to two gerunds, creating the same structural inconsistency the original had. A quick strategy: whenever you see a list, label each element's grammatical form (gerund, infinitive, noun phrase, clause) before comparing answer choices. The correct answer will be the one where every label matches — and it's almost always the option that uses the simplest, most consistent form throughout.