0

Chickens are becoming popular backyard pets, in part because of the eggs, but also because raising them is fun.

I wonder if the example sentence above exhibits faulty parallelism, as in the first part of the phrase "in part X but also Y," we have X= "because of + noun," while in the second part we have Y="because+gerund."

Improve this question
3
  • Note that "parallelism" isn't actually a rule of English grammar.
    – user230
    Oct 28, 2015 at 2:59
  • @snailboat No? How so?
    – Luke
    Oct 28, 2015 at 3:13
  • 1
    Parallelism is used for a variety of reasons, but "correct" English grammar is not one of them. Parallelism lends a certain balance to expression. Listeners/readers have come to expect it. It can be overdone, but in moderation it can be quite effective. For one thing, it makes some concepts easier to understand and retain. Compare "Seeing something happen will make you believe what you saw," and "Seeing is believing." Which sentence is easier to retain? The first sentence is fine, grammatically; the second sentence is concise, economical, memorable. Moreover, it is a very common expression.
    – rhetorician
    Oct 28, 2015 at 13:08

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

Parallelism is not mandatory. It is simply flow and style.

"because raising them is fun" and "because of the eggs" are valid follow-up clauses to connect to "Chickens are becoming popular backyard pets", so it is grammatically correct.

Improve this answer
1
  • Thanks for your explanation. I didn't know it wasn't mandatory.
    – Luke
    Oct 28, 2015 at 3:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .