SC: According to some analysts, the gains :

[CrystalSpringston]

I have a question on the parallelism.
Why can the "will" omitted in the second clause?

According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect growing
confidence that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier
in the year and (will) instead come in for a “soft landing,” followed by a gradual increase
in business activity.

I ruled out the correct answer because the the missing of will viloates the parallelism. Don't understand why it is acceptable?

Thank you!

[tim]

You are going about parallelism (and sentence correction in general) completely backwards: Instead of asking why things are correct, you should be asking why they are incorrect. I appreciate that you've expressed what you think is incorrect about this construction, so I will help you see the error you've made:

You have arbitrarily decided that YOU want the parallel element on the left to start with "will". The thing is, that's not your choice to make; it's the GMAT's. You could just as easily (and just as incorrectly) have decided you wanted to start the first parallel element with "the economy", in which case you would now be asking why the words "the economy will" were omitted after the "and instead". Because you can never know where the GMAT wants the parallel element to start just by looking to the left of the marker, you need to start by looking instead to the right. After the "and instead" (our parallel marker) we see the word "come", which is a verb. Now look to the left to see if you can find a verb: "avoid" is that verb. Now we have perfect parallelism, the "avoid..." portion and the "come..." portion. The preamble ("...the economy will") applies to both of these parts.

[CrystalSpringston]

You are going about parallelism (and sentence correction in general) completely backwards: Instead of asking why things are correct, you should be asking why they are incorrect. I appreciate that you've expressed what you think is incorrect about this construction, so I will help you see the error you've made:

You have arbitrarily decided that YOU want the parallel element on the left to start with "will". The thing is, that's not your choice to make; it's the GMAT's. You could just as easily (and just as incorrectly) have decided you wanted to start the first parallel element with "the economy", in which case you would now be asking why the words "the economy will" were omitted after the "and instead". Because you can never know where the GMAT wants the parallel element to start just by looking to the left of the marker, you need to start by looking instead to the right. After the "and instead" (our parallel marker) we see the word "come", which is a verb. Now look to the left to see if you can find a verb: "avoid" is that verb. Now we have perfect parallelism, the "avoid..." portion and the "come..." portion. The preamble ("...the economy will") applies to both of these parts.

Hi Tim,
Thank you for your explanation.
I think I got what you said above. In this sentence, GMAT wants to make "avoid" parallelled with "come".
What if they start the parallelism with the "will"? Is it fine to say:
According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect growing confidence that the economy will avoid the recession that many had feared earlier in the year and instead will come in for a “soft landing,” followed by a gradual increase in business activity.

[RonPurewal]

that would also work.

[CrystalSpringston]

that would also work.

Ron, Thanks. It is much clear to me now!

[tim]

Glad to hear it. Keep in mind that there are often several ways to create a parallel structure correctly. Just because you think of one possibility doesn't mean all the other possibilities are wrong.

[CrystalSpringston]

Glad to hear it. Keep in mind that there are often several ways to create a parallel structure correctly. Just because you think of one possibility doesn't mean all the other possibilities are wrong.

Thank you. I really learned something from the mistake made.

[tim]

That's what we're here for! Glad we could help.

[JohnW717]

Hi instructor,

Can you explain why C is incorrect?

According to OG explantation, "earlier in the year should follow many had feared, rather than preceding it; instead to come does not complete second part of the sentence idiomatically".

According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect growing confidence in the economy's ability to avoid the recession, something earlier in the year many had feared and in stead to come in for a "soft landing," followed by a gradual increase in business activity.

"instead to come" should be parallel to "to avoid the recession". How is C not idiomatically? Thanks a lot!

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

I'm confused. Are we dealing with the same problem here? Your answer C doesn't match with the original problem posted. Also, when you say 'OG explanation', what source are you referring to please? This folder is for problems from GMAT Prep exams, and these problems don't have explanations.

In any case, don't trust official explanations: they are vague and often inconsistent. Let me do my best to explain the problems in the sentence you posted:

According to some analysts, the gains in the stock market reflect growing confidence in the economy's ability to avoid the recession, something earlier in the year many had feared and instead to come in for a "soft landing," followed by a gradual increase in business activity.
1. The modifier 'earlier in the year' seems to be modifying the word 'something'. However, the event that took place earlier in the year was people fearing the recession, not the recession itself. Changing the position of a modifier often changes the meaning of a sentence. Consider the different meanings of these two sentences (both of which are correct):
Yesterday I had a dream that my dog ran away.
I had a dream that my dog ran away yesterday.
2. The parallel construction 'to avoid...and...to come' is illogical. If we analyze the parallel construction it seems to say that 'there's growing confidence in the economy's ability to avoid the recession' (this bit is fine), but 'there's growing confidence in the economy's ability to come in for a "soft landing"'. I don't think this makes sense: the "soft landing" part is a prediction about the economy, not an ability.