Making all surfaces slippery and vehicles lose traction

[Glizdka]

Does the following sentence make sense if I omit making?

---

Winter brings the most dangerous type of precipitation for drivers, a fine mist that immediately turns into a thin layer of ice, making all surfaces slippery and (making) vehicles lose traction.

 

[probus]

It would still make perfect sense to me.

 

[Glizdka]

My concern is how one might parse it. The "vehicles lose traction" part looks like lose is the main verb, independent of making used easier.

---

[Vehicles lose traction] AND [the mist makes surfaces slippery]
...instead of...
[The mist makes vehicles lose traction] AND [the mist makes surfaces slippery].

---

What if I reverse the order and say "Winter brings the most dangerous type of precipitation for drivers, a fine mist that immediately turns into a thin layer of ice, making vehicles lose traction and (making) all surfaces slippery"? Does that still work?

 

[jutfrank]

My concern is how one might parse it. The "vehicles lose traction" part looks like lose is the main verb, independent of making used easier.

So leave the second making in place then.

What if I reverse the order and say "Winter brings the most dangerous type of precipitation for drivers, a fine mist that immediately turns into a thin layer of ice, making vehicles lose traction and (making) all surfaces slippery"? Does that still work?

Yes, that avoids the problem.

 

[Tdol]

I'd use a colon after drivers.