Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole li

(A) that a black hole lies at the center of the Milky Way and of

(B) that a black hole lies at the Milky Way's center and

(C) that there is a black hole lying at the Milky Way’s center and

(D) of a black hole lying at the Milky Way's center and

(E) of a black hole that lies at the center of the Milky Way and of

Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole lies at the center of the Milky Way and of many of the 100 billion other galaxies estimated to exist in the universe.

We featured this thing in our latest YouTube webinar on parallelism and meaning, but… well, you’ll have to sift through an hourlong video to find the explanation in there. So here’s the quicker, written version that you could print out and post on your office wall. Or, um… something.


“And” is our parallelism trigger, and it’s followed by the prepositional phrase “of many of the other…” So here’s what the parallelism looks like: “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole lies at the center of the Milky Way and of many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

Does that actually make sense? Sure: “recent findings lend support to the theory that a black hole lies at the center… of many of the 100 billion other galaxies…” Let’s keep (A).


If we do the same thing that we did in (A), we have problems.

The parallelism trigger “and” is followed by the noun “many of the 100 billion other galaxies.” I guess that’s parallel to the noun “the Milky Way’s center”?

So we’d have “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole lies at the Milky Way’s center and many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

That makes no sense. The “stem” – the part of the sentence that immediate precedes the parallel list – just doesn’t work with the second item in the list: “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole lies at… many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

So (B) is out.


(C) has basically the same error as (B): “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that there is a black hole lying at the Milky Way’s center and many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

Again, that “stem” – “recent findings lend strong support to the theory that there is a black hole lying at” – makes no sense with the second item in the list. We’d have: “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that there is a black hole lying at… many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

(C) is gone, too.


(D) basically has the same problem as (B) and (C). “And” is still followed by the same noun, “many of the 100 billion other galaxies. And that still doesn’t make any sense: “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory of a black hole lying at… many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

Plus, I’m not sure that it makes a whole lot of sense to say “the theory of a black hole lying at the Milky Way’s center.” The phrase “the theory of _____” works if you can summarize that theory as a single noun: “the theory of relativity” or “the theory of evolution”, for example. But “the theory of a black hole”? I’m not so sure about that. “… the theory that a black hole lies at the center of the galaxy…” makes much more sense.

And if you don’t buy anything I wrote in that last paragraph, that’s cool for now. The parallelism issue still wipes out (D).


So the parallelism is fine here, since it’s exactly the same as in (A). So what’s the only real difference between (A) and (E)? It’s that goofy difference between “the theory of a black hole that lies…” and “the theory that a black hole lies…” And the latter makes more sense.

If you picked (E), that’s not terrible. But given the choice, (A) is better.

(A) that a black hole lies at the center of the Milky Way and of

(B) that a black hole lies at the Milky Way's center and

(C) that there is a black hole lying at the Milky Way’s center and

(D) of a black hole lying at the Milky Way's center and

(E) of a black hole that lies at the center of the Milky Way and of

Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole lies at the center of the Milky Way and of many of the 100 billion other galaxies estimated to exist in the universe.

We featured this thing in our latest YouTube webinar on parallelism and meaning, but… well, you’ll have to sift through an hourlong video to find the explanation in there. So here’s the quicker, written version that you could print out and post on your office wall. Or, um… something.


“And” is our parallelism trigger, and it’s followed by the prepositional phrase “of many of the other…” So here’s what the parallelism looks like: “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole lies at the center of the Milky Way and of many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

Does that actually make sense? Sure: “recent findings lend support to the theory that a black hole lies at the center… of many of the 100 billion other galaxies…” Let’s keep (A).


Ah, I think I see the confusion.
If we do the same thing that we did in (A), we have problems.

The parallelism trigger “and” is followed by the noun “many of the 100 billion other galaxies.” I guess that’s parallel to the noun “the Milky Way’s center”?

So we’d have “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole lies at the Milky Way’s center and many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

That makes no sense. The “stem” – the part of the sentence that immediate precedes the parallel list – just doesn’t work with the second item in the list: “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that a black hole lies at… many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

So (B) is out.


(C) has basically the same error as (B): “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that there is a black hole lying at the Milky Way’s center and many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

Again, that “stem” – “recent findings lend strong support to the theory that there is a black hole lying at” – makes no sense with the second item in the list. We’d have: “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory that there is a black hole lying at… many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

(C) is gone, too.


(D) basically has the same problem as (B) and (C). “And” is still followed by the same noun, “many of the 100 billion other galaxies. And that still doesn’t make any sense: “Recent findings lend strong support to the theory of a black hole lying at… many of the 100 billion other galaxies…”

Plus, I’m not sure that it makes a whole lot of sense to say “the theory of a black hole lying at the Milky Way’s center.” The phrase “the theory of _____” works if you can summarize that theory as a single noun: “the theory of relativity” or “the theory of evolution”, for example. But “the theory of a black hole”? I’m not so sure about that. “… the theory that a black hole lies at the center of the galaxy…” makes much more sense.

And if you don’t buy anything I wrote in that last paragraph, that’s cool for now. The parallelism issue still wipes out (D).


So the parallelism is fine here, since it’s exactly the same as in (A). So what’s the only real difference between (A) and (E)? It’s that goofy difference between “the theory of a black hole that lies…” and “the theory that a black hole lies…” And the latter makes more sense.

If you picked (E), that’s not terrible. But given the choice, (A) is better.

(A) that a black hole lies at the center of the Milky Way and of

(B) that a black hole lies at the Milky Way's center and

(C) that there is a black hole lying at the Milky Way’s center and

(D) of a black hole lying at the Milky Way's center and

(E) of a black hole that lies at the center of the Milky Way and of