Fix minor typo in concurrent mode adoption docs (#2472)

content/docs/concurrent-mode-adoption.md

@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ We think it is better to offer a [gradual migration strategy](/docs/faq-versioni
 
 In practice, we expect that most apps using Legacy Mode today should be able to migrate at least to the Blocking Mode (if not Concurrent Mode). This fragmentation can be annoying for libraries that aim to support all Modes in the short term. However, gradually moving the ecosystem away from the Legacy Mode will also *solve* problems that affect major libraries in the React ecosystem, such as [confusing Suspense behavior when reading layout](https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/14536) and [lack of consistent batching guarantees](https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/15080). There's a number of bugs that can't be fixed in Legacy Mode without changing semantics, but don't exist in Blocking and Concurrent Modes.
 
-You can think of the Blocking Mode as of a "gracefully degraded" version of the Concurrent Mode. **As a result, in longer term we should be able to converge and stop thinking about different Modes altogether.** But for now, Modes are an important migration strategy. They let everyone decide when a migration is worth it, and upgrade at their own pace.
+You can think of the Blocking Mode as a "gracefully degraded" version of the Concurrent Mode. **As a result, in longer term we should be able to converge and stop thinking about different Modes altogether.** But for now, Modes are an important migration strategy. They let everyone decide when a migration is worth it, and upgrade at their own pace.
 
 ### Feature Comparison {#feature-comparison}