Parallelism - GED Language Arts (RLA)

Since the first two items in this sentence’s list begin with “in which,” the third must do the same. The verb should remain in the present tense, as the first two items do. (An alternate fix would be to eliminate “in which” from the second item in the list. This would make the first “in which” apply to all three parts of the list equally.)

While this sentence may appear correct at first glance, but consider the two things that are being compared: being opposed to marriage equality (a stance) and “any challenge to his rigid, traditionalist beliefs” (an opinion). To change this faulty parallelism, we simply need to add the correct subject and verb to the latter part of the sentence.

Here, the simplest solution is the best. Adding an “in” to “summer” makes each item in the list parallel (a noun preceded by a preposition). No change to the punctuation needs to be made in this case.

While this sentence sounds correct spoken aloud, it is missing an apostrophe. We don’t mean to compare the speaker’s love of the cottage with dogs; we mean to compare the speaker’s love with the dogs’ love. Thus, adding an apostrophe to “dogs” solves the faulty parallelism. (The choice “that of our dogs’” goes too far in making the dogs doubly possessive and is also clunky.)

The key to this question is to notice the parallel use of verbs and the subordinate clauses that begin with "that." See the emphasized selection below, which uses boldface and underlining to show you these portions clearly:

"Hear me for my cause, and be silent, that you may hear. Believe me for mine honor, and have respect to mine honor, that you may believe. Censure me in your wisdom, and awake your senses, that you may the better judge."

In each of these sentences, Brutus uses two verbs in the imperative mood followed by an explanation of why they are to listen to the commands made by the verbs. This establishes the "rhythm" of the parallelism and makes these three sentences clearly related in structure.

Since the first two items in this sentence’s list begin with “in which,” the third must do the same. The verb should remain in the present tense, as the first two items do. (An alternate fix would be to eliminate “in which” from the second item in the list. This would make the first “in which” apply to all three parts of the list equally.)

While this sentence may appear correct at first glance, but consider the two things that are being compared: being opposed to marriage equality (a stance) and “any challenge to his rigid, traditionalist beliefs” (an opinion). To change this faulty parallelism, we simply need to add the correct subject and verb to the latter part of the sentence.

Here, the simplest solution is the best. Adding an “in” to “summer” makes each item in the list parallel (a noun preceded by a preposition). No change to the punctuation needs to be made in this case.

While this sentence sounds correct spoken aloud, it is missing an apostrophe. We don’t mean to compare the speaker’s love of the cottage with dogs; we mean to compare the speaker’s love with the dogs’ love. Thus, adding an apostrophe to “dogs” solves the faulty parallelism. (The choice “that of our dogs’” goes too far in making the dogs doubly possessive and is also clunky.)

The key to this question is to notice the parallel use of verbs and the subordinate clauses that begin with "that." See the emphasized selection below, which uses boldface and underlining to show you these portions clearly:

"Hear me for my cause, and be silent, that you may hear. Believe me for mine honor, and have respect to mine honor, that you may believe. Censure me in your wisdom, and awake your senses, that you may the better judge."

In each of these sentences, Brutus uses two verbs in the imperative mood followed by an explanation of why they are to listen to the commands made by the verbs. This establishes the "rhythm" of the parallelism and makes these three sentences clearly related in structure.

Since the first two items in this sentence’s list begin with “in which,” the third must do the same. The verb should remain in the present tense, as the first two items do. (An alternate fix would be to eliminate “in which” from the second item in the list. This would make the first “in which” apply to all three parts of the list equally.)

While this sentence may appear correct at first glance, but consider the two things that are being compared: being opposed to marriage equality (a stance) and “any challenge to his rigid, traditionalist beliefs” (an opinion). To change this faulty parallelism, we simply need to add the correct subject and verb to the latter part of the sentence.

Here, the simplest solution is the best. Adding an “in” to “summer” makes each item in the list parallel (a noun preceded by a preposition). No change to the punctuation needs to be made in this case.

While this sentence sounds correct spoken aloud, it is missing an apostrophe. We don’t mean to compare the speaker’s love of the cottage with dogs; we mean to compare the speaker’s love with the dogs’ love. Thus, adding an apostrophe to “dogs” solves the faulty parallelism. (The choice “that of our dogs’” goes too far in making the dogs doubly possessive and is also clunky.)

The key to this question is to notice the parallel use of verbs and the subordinate clauses that begin with "that." See the emphasized selection below, which uses boldface and underlining to show you these portions clearly:

"Hear me for my cause, and be silent, that you may hear. Believe me for mine honor, and have respect to mine honor, that you may believe. Censure me in your wisdom, and awake your senses, that you may the better judge."

In each of these sentences, Brutus uses two verbs in the imperative mood followed by an explanation of why they are to listen to the commands made by the verbs. This establishes the "rhythm" of the parallelism and makes these three sentences clearly related in structure.

Since the first two items in this sentence’s list begin with “in which,” the third must do the same. The verb should remain in the present tense, as the first two items do. (An alternate fix would be to eliminate “in which” from the second item in the list. This would make the first “in which” apply to all three parts of the list equally.)

While this sentence may appear correct at first glance, but consider the two things that are being compared: being opposed to marriage equality (a stance) and “any challenge to his rigid, traditionalist beliefs” (an opinion). To change this faulty parallelism, we simply need to add the correct subject and verb to the latter part of the sentence.

Here, the simplest solution is the best. Adding an “in” to “summer” makes each item in the list parallel (a noun preceded by a preposition). No change to the punctuation needs to be made in this case.

While this sentence sounds correct spoken aloud, it is missing an apostrophe. We don’t mean to compare the speaker’s love of the cottage with dogs; we mean to compare the speaker’s love with the dogs’ love. Thus, adding an apostrophe to “dogs” solves the faulty parallelism. (The choice “that of our dogs’” goes too far in making the dogs doubly possessive and is also clunky.)