Right now the list reads plural, plural, and singular. Parallelism states that all words in a list should have the same form. So they should all be plural, or all singular.
While that is true, it also means various types of alterations in consciousness and paradigm shifts, but there is really only one type of existential crisis.
Not really. A midlife crisis and a psychotic episode could both be called existential crises. I don’t think there’s a hard definition to it like you seem to be asserting.
Nope.
Right now the list reads plural, plural, and singular. Parallelism states that all words in a list should have the same form. So they should all be plural, or all singular.
While that is true, it also means various types of alterations in consciousness and paradigm shifts, but there is really only one type of existential crisis.
Well I don’t really agree with that and I also don’t think it’s a solution to faulty parallelism.
There are multiple types of crises, but every existential crisis is an existential crisis. The plurality is negated by the modifier, “existential.”
Not really. A midlife crisis and a psychotic episode could both be called existential crises. I don’t think there’s a hard definition to it like you seem to be asserting.
I can already tell that if I continue this conversation, you’ll be the one in the picture.
Meaning you’re going to refuse to learn about faulty parallelism?
Meaning you’re getting blocked for your own good.
Funny, despite your clever picture, I don’t seem to be the one suffering in this exchange.