Parallel Construction - ACT English

Whenever you are given two items in a list, you need to make sure that those items are both parallel with one another. The first item in the list is "in terms of the types". In order to be parallel to this, the next item must also be in the form of "in terms of." The only answer choice that does this is "and in terms of". "As well as" and "as well as in terms of" can be eliminated because the word both must always be paired with the word "and," and leaving the words as is (NO CHANGE) can be eliminated because it isn't parallel to the first item in the list.

Whenever you have a list within a question on the ACT, you need to make sure that each of the parts of the list is parallel to one another. Because the first two items in the list are in the form of "is __", the third item in the list must also be in this form. "Is better mixed" and "is mixing better" are both in this form, but "better mixed" (NO CHANGE) and "mixes better" are not. To choose between "is better mixed" and "is mixing better", look at the second word. The word "mixed" matches the word "compacted" earlier in the list, while "mixing" does not.

Whenever part of a list is underlined within the ACT English section, remember that you must always check to make sure that the list is parallel and correctly separated by commas. In this case, the two items in the list are "to consult historical records" and "talk of members of the community." Notice that while you have the parallel verbs "consult" and "talk" as the two items in your list, the logic doesn't make sense. If you are investigating to find artifacts, you wouldn't talk about members of the community - you would talk with them. The only answer that maintains parallelism and logic is " talk to."

When encountering a list, ensure that each item in the list is presented in the same way, maintaining a parallel structure. In this case, the first two items, “checking” and “skimming,” is given in the present participle. For that reason, “reviewed” doesn’t belong here, as it is in the past simple tense. Similarly, “he reviewed” is not parallel as well as redundant, as “he” already appears at the start of the next clause. Furthermore, “he has reviewed” is in the past perfect tense, which is likewise different than the present participle used in the previous items. The correct answer, “reviewing,” is in the present participle, and thus maintains parallel structure within the list.

When encountering a list, ensure that each item in the list is presented in the same way, maintaining a parallel structure. In this case, the list begins with two items, “went to the ocean” and “saw a whale,” given in the past tense. For this reason, “trying” doesn’t fit, because it is given in the present tense. If “tried” is chosen, the list has no coordinating conjunction, which is necessary for a grammatical list. With no change, the “she” is redundant, as the previous item has been presented without a subject. For this reason, “and tried” is the best answer, as it completes the list without redundancy and while maintaining a parallel structure.

When encountering a list, ensure that each item in the list is presented in the same way, maintaining a parallel structure. In this case, the list begins with two adjectives describing Kaitlyn. For this reason, “had the focus,” which attributes focus to Kaitlyn by suggesting that she “had” it, is not parallel to the other items. Similarly, “could focus” presents a modal verb describing her ability to focus, instead of a mere adjective. The redundancy of “was,” which appears before the list and in “was focused,” shows that it is not a viable option. The remaining choice, “focused,” is an adjective which is parallel to the other two in the list, and is thus our correct answer.

When contrasting two items, it’s important they remain parallel in their structure. In this case, the comparison is being drawn between one option, “to pry the door open,” given as an infinitive, and a less efficient alternative. One candidate, “keep banging,” is given in the simple present tense, which does not match the infinitive form of the other option. Similarly, “kept banging” is given in the simple past tense, not the infinitive. Another possibility, “keeping to bang,” might at first seem to incorporate an infinitive, but is in reality altogether ungrammatical. However, if the sentence remains unchanged, “to keep banging,” an infinitive, is correctly parallel to “to pry.”

When drawing a comparison between two items, it’s important they remain parallel in their structure. In this case, “my dance moves” cannot be compared directly to “my dad,” but instead must be contrasted with the dance moves of the speaker’s dad, meaning the underlined portion should not be deleted. On the other hand, “these done by” appears to be an attempt to compare the dance moves in parallel, but “these” suggests a proximity to the moves that do not make sense in context. Of the remaining two options, “the dance moves done by” is clunkier and less succinct than “those of,” which successfully draws a parallel comparison while avoiding redundancy and unnecessary wordiness.

When contrasting two items, it’s important they remain parallel in their structure. In this case, because the first item, “playing basketball,” is given as a gerund verb, the second item should be given the same way. This means that the underlined portion should not be deleted. Although “having seen” is a gerund, it is given in the past tense, which is not parallel to “playing basketball,” which is in the present tense. Of the remaining choices, “having this opportunity to see” is clunkier than “seeing,” which retains parallel structure without being unnecessarily verbose or using “this,” which is unnecessary in this context.

When encountering a list, ensure that each item in the list is presented in the same way, maintaining parallel structure. In this case, the first three items in the list are actions, given in the simple present tense. Accordingly, “to relax,” which is in the infinitive form, is not effectively parallel to the previous listed actions. A similar option, “to get to relax,” is also an infinitive, albeit a more complex one, and is incorrect for the same reasons. Though “get to relax” is given in the simple present tense, “get to” is redundant with a descriptor which precedes the list, “a chance,” as both convey the same sense of opportunity. For this reason, “relax,” which is parallel in its use of the simple present and in no way redundant, is the best choice.

When encountering a list, ensure that each item in the list is presented in the same way, maintaining parallel structure. In this case, the first two items in the list are nouns. If the sentence remains unchanged, “to see the world differently,” a verb phrase in the infinitive form, is not parallel to the nouns presented previously. Likewise, “seeing the world different” is a verb in the present participle tense, meaning it is not parallel, and also uses an adjective, “different,” to modify the verb, which is ungrammatical. Of the remaining two options, both are noun phrases, meaning they are parallel in structure, but “a differently outlook on the world” ungrammatically modifies a noun with an adverb, meaning that “a different outlook on the world” is the correct choice, as it is both parallel and grammatical.

When drawing a comparison between two items, it’s important they remain parallel in their structure. In this case, “my dance moves” cannot be compared directly to “my dad,” but instead must be contrasted with the dance moves of the speaker’s dad, meaning the underlined portion should not be deleted. On the other hand, “these done by” appears to be an attempt to compare the dance moves in parallel, but “these” suggests a proximity to the moves that do not make sense in context. Of the remaining two options, “the dance moves done by” is clunkier and less succinct than “those of,” which successfully draws a parallel comparison while avoiding redundancy and unnecessary wordiness.

When contrasting two items, it’s important they remain parallel in their structure. In this case, because the first item, “playing basketball,” is given as a gerund verb, the second item should be given the same way. This means that the underlined portion should not be deleted. Although “having seen” is a gerund, it is given in the past tense, which is not parallel to “playing basketball,” which is in the present tense. Of the remaining choices, “having this opportunity to see” is clunkier than “seeing,” which retains parallel structure without being unnecessarily verbose or using “this,” which is unnecessary in this context.

Whenever you are given two items in a list, you need to make sure that those items are both parallel with one another. The first item in the list is "in terms of the types". In order to be parallel to this, the next item must also be in the form of "in terms of." The only answer choice that does this is "and in terms of". "As well as" and "as well as in terms of" can be eliminated because the word both must always be paired with the word "and," and leaving the words as is (NO CHANGE) can be eliminated because it isn't parallel to the first item in the list.

Whenever you have a list within a question on the ACT, you need to make sure that each of the parts of the list is parallel to one another. Because the first two items in the list are in the form of "is __", the third item in the list must also be in this form. "Is better mixed" and "is mixing better" are both in this form, but "better mixed" (NO CHANGE) and "mixes better" are not. To choose between "is better mixed" and "is mixing better", look at the second word. The word "mixed" matches the word "compacted" earlier in the list, while "mixing" does not.

Whenever part of a list is underlined within the ACT English section, remember that you must always check to make sure that the list is parallel and correctly separated by commas. In this case, the two items in the list are "to consult historical records" and "talk of members of the community." Notice that while you have the parallel verbs "consult" and "talk" as the two items in your list, the logic doesn't make sense. If you are investigating to find artifacts, you wouldn't talk about members of the community - you would talk with them. The only answer that maintains parallelism and logic is " talk to."

When encountering a list, ensure that each item in the list is presented in the same way, maintaining a parallel structure. In this case, the first two items, “checking” and “skimming,” is given in the present participle. For that reason, “reviewed” doesn’t belong here, as it is in the past simple tense. Similarly, “he reviewed” is not parallel as well as redundant, as “he” already appears at the start of the next clause. Furthermore, “he has reviewed” is in the past perfect tense, which is likewise different than the present participle used in the previous items. The correct answer, “reviewing,” is in the present participle, and thus maintains parallel structure within the list.

When encountering a list, ensure that each item in the list is presented in the same way, maintaining a parallel structure. In this case, the list begins with two items, “went to the ocean” and “saw a whale,” given in the past tense. For this reason, “trying” doesn’t fit, because it is given in the present tense. If “tried” is chosen, the list has no coordinating conjunction, which is necessary for a grammatical list. With no change, the “she” is redundant, as the previous item has been presented without a subject. For this reason, “and tried” is the best answer, as it completes the list without redundancy and while maintaining a parallel structure.

When encountering a list, ensure that each item in the list is presented in the same way, maintaining a parallel structure. In this case, the list begins with two adjectives describing Kaitlyn. For this reason, “had the focus,” which attributes focus to Kaitlyn by suggesting that she “had” it, is not parallel to the other items. Similarly, “could focus” presents a modal verb describing her ability to focus, instead of a mere adjective. The redundancy of “was,” which appears before the list and in “was focused,” shows that it is not a viable option. The remaining choice, “focused,” is an adjective which is parallel to the other two in the list, and is thus our correct answer.

When contrasting two items, it’s important they remain parallel in their structure. In this case, the comparison is being drawn between one option, “to pry the door open,” given as an infinitive, and a less efficient alternative. One candidate, “keep banging,” is given in the simple present tense, which does not match the infinitive form of the other option. Similarly, “kept banging” is given in the simple past tense, not the infinitive. Another possibility, “keeping to bang,” might at first seem to incorporate an infinitive, but is in reality altogether ungrammatical. However, if the sentence remains unchanged, “to keep banging,” an infinitive, is correctly parallel to “to pry.”