How about we figure out a better way to make our learning even easier, huh? Well then, answer this question: what does it mean for something (one object, for example) to be parallel to another?
Well, presenting yourself in a parallel way means being on the same plane, on the same level, isn't it?
Now that we have an idea about the meaning of the subject that guides our discussion, we invite you to access the text "Coordinating conjunctions”.
There you can recall the characteristics of those sentences considered independent, syntactically speaking, isn't it true? So, continuing our study, let's analyze some examples:
Peter likes of ice cream and chocolate.
When analyzing the period in question, we observe that the elements that constitute it have the same syntactic structure. Don't know why? Don't worry, we'll find out from now on:
The terms “ice cream” and “chocolate” act as complements to the verb like, therefore, they represent indirect objects, do you agree?
Well, when this happens we say that in prayer there is syntactic parallelism.
So let's look at another example:
Marcos arrived and did his homework.
We also have two independent clauses with regard to syntactic aspects, as they have subject and predicate, that is:
Marcos has arrived.
Marcos did his homework.
Another little question: at what time are the verbs of both clauses? Do not know?
It's very simple, as they are in the indicative past perfect tense, because they indicate an action that has already taken place, indicating a completed idea.
Thus, because the verbs are conjugated at the same time, we can say that there was syntactic parallelism too, ok?
But, you see, the situation doesn't always happen that way, so let's now look at issues related to meaning, also called semantic issues:
Pedro likes ice cream and riding a bike.
With regard to syntactic terms, we can say that parallelism was established, as we verified the presence of all the elements for the sentence to present itself with meaning. But, at the level of ideas, that is, at the semantic level, there was a distortion there, because we noticed two actions in which one in no way resembles the other:enjoy ice cream and ride a bike.
Then we say that there was no semantic parallelism.
As opposed to saying that“Pedro likes ice cream and chocolate”, in which we can include both syntactic and semantic parallelism.
By Vânia Duarte
Graduated in Letters
