<p>Dora Kleiner tirelessly worked to make sure New York historical buildings were designated as historical sites, protected by law, and adequately preserved</p>
<p>What is no error or was adequately wrong?
only adequately was underlined for this question so i thought it was no error.
But is it wrong because it is not parallel?</p>
<p>Instead of reading the sentence in its normal form:
“Dora Kleiner tirelessly worked to make sure New York historical buildings were designated as historical sites, protected by law, and adequately preserved”</p>
<p>…Picture the sentence like this:
“Dora Kleiner tirelessly worked to make sure New York historical buildings were adequately preserved.”</p>
<p>Everything else is just a distraction that doesn’t really alter anything - only allow information. The way I see it, after writing it this way, I don;t see a problem with “adequately”.</p>
<p>but shouldn’t it keep the parallel pattern so the desigatED and preotectED?
i hope you are right though</p>
<p>Eehh, I mean I’m only trying to contribute haha. My best writing is only like 750, so I’m not the best one to trust. I do, however, remember reading that one should dismiss the idea of something being wrong because of the way it is arranged. It seems like it would make MORE sense if it were “preserved adequately” but that is simply unattainable</p>
<p>It’s fine. I’m a writer who paradoxically can’t tell you why something is written correctly - but I know it when I see it. Lol Designated, protected, and preserved are parallel. To say “preserved adequately” sounds awkward and I would confidently never write it that way.</p>
<p>I’ve seen a few people arguing that they wished it were written that way.
I mean, to me, the sentence appears parallel because when describing Dora, the adverb comes before the verb, “tirelessly worked”. So later, when the similar function occurs, “adequately preserved” (also remembering that the other verbs were also in the ED tense) wouldn’t it be correct as is?</p>
<p>To clarify, I’m completely blanking on grammatical terms right now.</p>
<p>I also said no error. I was a little bit unsure, but I’m fairly confident “no error” was correct. I feel like if they wanted us to change the order of the two words, “adequately preserved” would have been underlined instead of just “adequately.” Let’s hope we’re right! :)</p>