This area is one where classic-Pentecostal practice has certainly fallen well short of the Biblical marker.
When it comes to order and the 'level' of expression of gifts we see Paul recommend in the passage, I agree.
Even though we regularly encounter Pentecostal (and charismatic) congregations who correctly stipulate that during their meetings, that we are to only have three prophecies, along with three prayers in tongues and that each tongue is to be accompanied by an interpretation.
I think the idea you are describing here is one of the errors of Pentecostals that try to promote order, on their understanding of order. Does the passage say anything about limiting the number of messages in tongues or prophecy in the meeting to two or three per meeting? Out of context, I could see how you could argue that for verse 27. But there is no way that could be what the section on prophecy means.
Paul instructed let the prophets speak two or three and let the other judge. But if a revelation comes to one sitting by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one.
Now, if only two or three people were the church in Corinth, then maybe it makes sense that he is limiting the number of prophecies to two or three, but we can see from the people mentioned in the epistle that there were more than three people in the Corinthian church. If ye all may all prophesy, then it is not true that the number of prophecies was limited to two or three because there were more than three people in the church.
The way I take is that the prophets give two or three prophetic utterances, and then the words are weighed carefully. The process can be repeated. If a prophet is speaking, he should yield the floor for someone else sitting by who receives a revelation. This method allows all to prophecy.
With that in mind, I see verse 27 as saying if one person is speaking in tongues, let him utter two or three utterances, and let one interpret. (One person does not suddenly turn into two or three people when speaking in tongues.)
Earlier in the passage, Paul speaks of the reaction of an unbeliever or uninstructed person when 'all prophesy.'
Something else to notice about Pentecostals and order is that the Azusa Street revival started to move toward what Paul writes about in this passage. One person would stand up and give an exhortation. Another would prophesy. Another would speak in tongues and interpret. Seymour spent much of his time with his head in a crate, probably something they used for chairs or pulpits, praying.
But when Pentecostals went back home, they reverted back to the Protestant tradition of having one pastor preach one long sermon. That's not what we see in I Corinthians where 'every one of you' uses their gifts. In Romans 12 Paul commands the one gifted to prophesy to prophesy, the one gifted to teach to teach, the one gifted to exhort to exhort. That makes a lot more sense in the kind of meetings described in I Corinthians 14, the only passage that goes into any multi-verse depth on how to handle the ministry of the word in an actual church meeting in the New Testament. If we want to know what to do in church from the New Testament, this chapter is it. It does not mention a pastor or a long sermon. 'Every one of you' can teach a doctrine or share a revelation or sing a psalm. Let it be done unto edifying.
Considering that in 1 Cor 14, Paul goes into some detail regarding the importance of intelligibility during our congregational meetings; we still encounter far too many congregations that not only allow more than three prophecies and tongues,
Good for them if they follow the commandments of the Lord for order. It doesn't make sense to say we are going to limit the number of things the Spirit specifically move things to say, but allow people to go on and on with good things that the Spirit isn't specifically moving them to say.
but they also allow their members to corporately sing in the Spirit (tongues) during these meetings.
I think the interpretation rule applies to singing in tongues too in church. I've seen a song in tongues interpreted.
