RonPurewal Wrote:parallelism does not require modifiers that match.
if it's possible to write the modifiers so that they match -- without distorting the meaning of the sentence -- then, sure. on the other hand, the context often demands different kinds of modifiers.
here, "comma + which" describes all logging, whereas "that burn..." describes only some surface fires.
(incidentally, this is the difference between "xxxx that yyyy" and "xxxx, which yyyy" -- and, more generally, the difference between modifiers that are blocked off by commas and modifiers that aren't.)
...so, it's not possible to write matching modifiers without distorting the meaning.
Hi,Ron
I am confused about what you explain here. In my view ,"comma + which" cannot modify the preceding noun(here , logging) ,but " which" without comma can modify the preceding noun. My question is why you said "comma + which" describes all logging. Can you clarify it ? Thank you, Ron .