[URGENT] test is next week 2

I thought, parallelism is the easiest topic dealt in English grammar but it turned out to be one of the most baffling topics i have studied so far,,

My questions go..

1. More people are visiting museums in US than in Cananda
-> according to the rule, shouldn't it be "ones in Canada" than "in canada"?

2. With her command of pathos and tragedy and being humorous, George Eliot is considered to be a great English novelist.
-> the book i'm studying says this sentence is wrong. but "With her command of pathos and tragedy and being humorous" is compound phrase that puts 2 idea (1. her commend of pathos and tragedy, and 2. her being humorous) in one, can't i say it's grammatically right?

3. The labor nuion is negotiating a contract with the hospital that will satisfy the demands of the workers and be acceptable to all levels of management.
-> I think here, the parallelism is between "that will satisfy" and "be acceptable to".
Why there is no need to put "will" before "be acceptable"?

[euncu]

1. a-More people are visiting museums in US than in Canada
b-More people are visiting museums in US than the ones in Canada

The both is OK and sounds fine to me. Maybe the first one emphasizes the country while the latter does it for the museums in Canada. We'd better wait for a native-speaker to pay a visit to this thread whether the both sentences do differ in the aspect they are referring to or they don't


2. With her command of pathos and tragedy and being humorous, George Eliot is considered to be a great English novelist.

It sounds good to me.I see nothing wrong

3. The labor union is negotiating a contract with the hospital that will satisfy the demands of the workers and be acceptable to all levels of management.

Yes,there should be "will" because it is about an action which will occur in the future (I mean the result of the negotiation will be declared to the concerning parties to see whether it will be both satisfying for the workers and acceptable for the management)

[Barb_D]

Hi,

Here's one guide for parallelism: At some point in the sentence, you have to be able to change the order of the elements and have the sentence remain grammatical. The things I put in brackets need to change places and still work grammatically.



1. More people are visiting museums [in the US] than [in Canada] -- Although the semantic meaning changes, it still works grammatically. This sentence is fine as is.


2. With her [command of pathos and tragedy] and [being humorous], George Eliot is considered to be a great English novelist.

Would you naturally say "With her being humorous, George Eliot is..."?

How could you rewrite "being humorous" to match "command of pathos and tragedy"? Perhaps "sense of humor" or "ability to express humor"?

Or, you could say "With her command of [pathos], [tragedy], and [the art of injecting humor into her writing], etc.



3. The labor union is negotiating a contract with the hospital that will [satisfy the demands of the workers] and [be acceptable to all levels of management].
-> I think here, the parallelism is between "that will satisfy" and "be acceptable to".
Why there is no need to put "will" before "be acceptable"? -- Does the bracketing help answer your question?

[Kondorosi]

More people are visiting museums in US than in Canada. - yes More people are visiting museums in US than (the ones) in Canada - no 2. With her command of pathos and tragedy and being humorous, George Eliot is considered to be a great English novelist. Sentence 2 is not correct. With his sense of humour and pathos, George.......3. The labor union is negotiating a contract with the hospital that will satisfy the demands of the workers and ... be acceptable to all levels of management.You cannot ellipt will in place of the three dots this way. The labor union is negotiating a contract with the hospital that will satisfy the demands of the workers and (that) will be acceptable to all levels of management.