To David, Picasso was his favorite long before it was ...

[bodhisattwabiswas]

This question is not taken from any source, but very much similar to a question of a good source. It is for my understanding and doubt clearance...


To David, Picasso was his favorite long before it was respectable to be a connoisseur of art, and David remained an art lover during xxxxxxxxxx

A. To David, Picasso was his favorite long before it was respectable to be a connoisseur of art,

B. For David, long before it was respectable to be a connoisseur of art, Picasso was his favorite,

C. David made Picasso his favorite long before to be a connoisseur of art was respectable,

D. Long before it was respectable to be a connoisseur of art, David made Picasso his favorite,

E. Long before it was respectable being a connoisseur of art, Picasso was favorite to David,


The very much similar and identical problem of a good source has D as OA.
My humble questions are: Can we eliminate A, B & E solely because of the violation of parallelism?
What is wrong in C? If we write rephrase C as "David made Picasso his favorite long before it was respectable to be a connoisseur of art,", will it be right?
Is the use of 'being' in E is awkward/unnecessary?
Between 'To David' and 'For David' (as in A & B), which one is better choice?

[RonPurewal]

The very much similar and identical problem of a good source has D as OA.

This is still ... not a citation of the source. It's not any better than having no citation at all. Please cite the original source.

If it's an OG problem, then give the edition and problem #. (If you've modified it enough, that becomes ok.)

[bodhisattwabiswas]

The very much similar and identical problem of a good source has D as OA.

This is still ... not a citation of the source. It's not any better than having no citation at all. Please cite the original source.

If it's an OG problem, then give the edition and problem #. (If you've modified it enough, that becomes ok.)

Thanks for the response...
The problem, to which it is similar to, is the 52nd SC problem in OG 13th Edition.
[actually my doubts are regarding the actual problem, but as it is not allowed to post OG problems here, I tried to .....]

[RonPurewal]

My humble questions are: Can we eliminate A, B & E solely because of the violation of parallelism?

I don't see any parallelism to consider in the first place. What do you think should be parallel elements here?

In A and B, the combination of "to David" and "his" is redundant.
To me, this is my favorite. Redundant.
This is my favorite. Not redundant.

E is not idiomatic. You can't write it is (adj) __ing; you have to write it is (adj) to __.

[RonPurewal]

What is wrong in C? If we write rephrase C as "David made Picasso his favorite long before it was respectable to be a connoisseur of art,", will it be right?

Yep, that's pretty much the problem. I can't give you a grammatical reason why, but before can't be placed in front of to __.

There's still a problem of meaning here -- you can't really "make something your favorite" (unless you can decide which thing is going to become your "favorite", which isn't really reasonable). Instead, you'd want to write something like "Picasso was David's favorite artist".

Between 'To David' and 'For David' (as in A & B), which one is better choice?

Neither, because "his" is there. Both create redundancy.

[bodhisattwabiswas]

My humble questions are: Can we eliminate A, B & E solely because of the violation of parallelism?

I don't see any parallelism to consider in the first place. What do you think should be parallel elements here?

In A and B, the combination of "to David" and "his" is redundant.
To me, this is my favorite. Redundant.
This is my favorite. Not redundant.

E is not idiomatic. You can't write it is (adj) __ing; you have to write it is (adj) to __.

What is wrong in C? If we write rephrase C as "David made Picasso his favorite long before it was respectable to be a connoisseur of art,", will it be right?

Yep, that's pretty much the problem. I can't give you a grammatical reason why, but before can't be placed in front of to __.

There's still a problem of meaning here -- you can't really "make something your favorite" (unless you can decide which thing is going to become your "favorite", which isn't really reasonable). Instead, you'd want to write something like "Picasso was David's favorite artist".

Between 'To David' and 'For David' (as in A & B), which one is better choice?

Neither, because "his" is there. Both create redundancy.

thanks a lot for the explanation...

[jlucero]

Glad it helped.