The below is a classic example of distinguishing the difference between the usage of “to” with “and” and “or”
Q.
The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or power tools.
(A) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or power tools. (B) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted the ownership of cars, the use of electricity, or of power tools.
(C) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or operate power tools.
(D) Owning cars, using electricity or power tools is not permitted to the most conservative Amish groups.
(E) Owning cars, electrical use, or operating power tools is not permissible among the most conservative Amish groups.
A. is wrong.
Reason it says- to own…,use…, or …..
If it would have been- to own…, use…., or operate…… then correct. Because we have “or” in the sentence the parallelism is what I’ve explained right now. Suppose, there were “and” in place of “or”.
The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, and power tools
This is wrong parallelism because it is …..to own…., ….use…,and …..
Rather it should have been … to own…, to use… and to operate…
B. is wrong because its not parallel… the ownership…, the use…of, or …..
C. is correct. To own…, ..use…, or ….operate… (as explained above)
D. awkward construction wrong.
E. awkward construction/no parallelism…wrong.
This is my understanding....If you have anything else do let me know.