correlative conjunction usage

Question

This question was obtained from a state-centered, national size reading comprehension test, YDS, in Turkey. Test is taken by over 300.000 educated people with varied ages, mostly from 20s to 50s. It aims to assess the language proficiency of the test takers.

When modern coastal fish-farming began 30 years ago, no one was doing things right, ---- for the environment ---- the industry’s long-term sustainability.

A) whether / or
B) such / as
C) so / that
D) either / or
E) as / as

Shortly, what would you go for?

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

d

Mamger · Answer

How can you explain the lack of PREPOSITION in the second part? Isn't it supposed to include FOR or something similiar after OR? As below:

When modern coastal fish-farming began 30 years ago, no one was doing things right, either FOR the environment or FOR the industry’s long-term sustainability.

Mister Micawber · Answer

It is an extremely common displacement, overlooked in the most respected publications.

Mamger · Answer

What about WHETHER... OR.. usage? We come across it in some respected publications, as well.

Meanwhile, I know many respected grammarians who explicitly look down on such emissions and think it is improper. Am I mistaken about that?

Fivejedjon · Answer

MamgerWhat about WHETHER... OR.. usage?

It's possible.

MamgerMeanwhile, I know many respected grammarians who explicitly look down on such eomissions and think it is improper.

I don't know many grammarians who would look down on this. Some writers of style guides might, but that's a different thing.

Mamger · Answer

So shame on our teachers, some were natives, who taught us to be strict on parallel structure while using correlative conjuctions. And shame on us, for we still continue this tradition. Shame on my short-time editor, who did not hesitate to use her famous red pencil whenever I "break" a parallel structure rule.

I was taught to be careful about parallel structure when using correlative conjunctions and teach in the same way. I have checked my grammar sources and searched the Internet and couldn't see ANY source giving permission to neglect this. On the contrary, many find this INCORRECT (apparently prescriptive view) and some think it shows POOR EDUCATION (who I believe are of descriptive point of view).

I really cannot understand; either we are faced with a classical native mistake, or I am awfully mistaken on this and about to learn something brand new.

PS: The original text used as a source for this includes a FOR after OR, as it should.

When modern coastal fish-farming began 30 years ago, virtually no one was doing things right, either FOR the environment or FOR the industry’s long-term sustainability.

PS again: I am well aware of the ellipsis but just don't come across a tolerance for parallel structures, except not... but....

correlative conjunction usage

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions