ksht
How do we recognize if the sentence is fine with one subordinate or need another one?
For example:
c.) Wrong: I want to retire to a place WHERE I can relax AND I pay low taxes.
d.) Right: I want to retire to a place WHERE I can relax AND WHERE I pay low taxes.
Why does the c.) which has only one subordinate like a.) is wrong as 'I can relax' and 'I pay low taxes' are parallel, but needs to be converted to d.) with two subordinates to be right ?
Can you please explain the difference between a.) and c.)
Above example is also taken from
MGMAT SC book.
The problem here isn't that the parallelism is bad. In fact, you're correct: the parallelism in (c) is right, because 'I can relax' and 'I pay low taxes' are parallel.
The reason (c) is wrong is actually something else: it's ambiguous. There are two different, equally reasonable ways to read (c).
First reading:
I want to retire to a place where I can relax
AND
I pay low taxes.
In this reading, the speaker is saying that she wants to retire to a certain place, and on top of that, she also pays low taxes right now.
Second reading:
I want to retire to a place where:
I can relax AND I pay low taxes.
In this reading, the speaker is saying that she wants to retire to a place where she can do BOTH things after she retires: relax, and pay low taxes.
Since you can't tell which one is right, the sentence is ambiguous and incorrect.
---
(d) is correct because there's only one grammatically correct way to read it. The part of the sentence after "and" is "WHERE I pay low taxes." Therefore, this piece can only be parallel with something else that has a WHERE before it. The only other WHERE is before "I can relax." So, you know what's supposed to be parallel to what: 'Where I can relax' is parallel to 'where I pay low taxes.' There's no ambiguity, and the parallelism is good, so the sentence is correct.