Delaying parallel elements and modifiers in parallelism

[yo4561]

Back again

I have a few more questions on parallelism from Reed's video.

Question 1:
He provides another example: "Movies are typically written in what is known as the 'three act structure,' giving them a comfortable familiarity even across genres but perhaps creating a predictability that has grown stale to audiences.

I realize the "x" element is "giving....familiarity" and the "y" element is "creating...predictability"
I was confused how this is parallel when there is a "perhaps" before the predictability. Why is the "perhaps" hanging out there? Are "giving" and "creating" modifiers and this is okay because the "perhaps" is serving as an adverbial modifier?

On the same sentence, in the video, Reed does not include "even across genres" in the "x" element nor "that has grown stale to audiences" in the "y" element. Are they not include in the "x" and "y" phrases because they are just modifiers at the end?

Question 2:
I realize the same time of grammar (e.g. nouns with nouns, verbs with verbs, etc.) must be parallel. However, what happens when modifiers come before element(s)? For example, let's say I have "green hat and balloon" (as my X and Y elements). Would this be wrong because one has a modifier and the other does not, or is it okay because they are both still nouns?

[esledge]

Question 1:
He provides another example: "Movies are typically written in what is known as the 'three act structure,' giving them a comfortable familiarity even across genres but perhaps creating a predictability that has grown stale to audiences.

I realize the "x" element is "giving....familiarity" and the "y" element is "creating...predictability"
I was confused how this is parallel when there is a "perhaps" before the predictability. Why is the "perhaps" hanging out there? Are "giving" and "creating" modifiers and this is okay because the "perhaps" is serving as an adverbial modifier?

On the same sentence, in the video, Reed does not include "even across genres" in the "x" element nor "that has grown stale to audiences" in the "y" element. Are they not include in the "x" and "y" phrases because they are just modifiers at the end?

You are right about the elements...well, actually, it's more accurate to say that x is only "giving" and y is only "creating." Beware of demanding more parallelism than is required. In Reed's example, it looks like "familiarity" and "predictability" are parallel objects, but "them" is actually the object of "giving," and that's ok because those parts don't have to match anyway!

Question 2:
I realize the same time of grammar (e.g. nouns with nouns, verbs with verbs, etc.) must be parallel. However, what happens when modifiers come before element(s)? For example, let's say I have "green hat and balloon" (as my X and Y elements). Would this be wrong because one has a modifier and the other does not, or is it okay because they are both still nouns?

Modifiers (and also articles sometimes) don't have to match for a sentence to be parallel:
The big old dog and the kitten that we recently adopted have become friends.

The dog has a couple of modifiers preceding it. The kitten has the modifier "that we recently adopted" following it. That's ok!

The exception would be something like your "I have a green hat and balloon" example, because when the modifier comes before the whole list, it could be considered part of the root phrase, modifying all of the parallel elements: both the hat and the balloon are green.

When only the hat is green, most authors would choose to reorder the list to make that clear: I have a balloon and a green hat.