Writers—both student and professional—sometimes have trouble constructing sentences. Appositives, participial phrases, prepositional phrases and dependent clauses end up in the wrong places—not near the nouns or pronouns they should modify. In spoken English, such “dangling” and misplaced modifiers are common. Our thinking moves faster than our speaking. Words don’t always come out of our mouths in the right order. We add sentence elements as we think of them. But written communication can—and should—be more precise. Written communication can be reread and edited for clarity.

Syntax problems in writing reflect fuzzy thinking. Writers who miss misplaced modifiers don’t truly understand what they are communicating. They don’t recognize that their word order is confusing. They appear to think that everyone reasons the same way and will be able to figure out what the text means.

That thinking indicates that the writer has abdicated his or her primary mission: clear, concise, correct communication. Why should readers have to figure out something that the writer hasn’t clearly presented?

The Associated Press Stylebook says: “Avoid modifiers that do not refer clearly and logically to some word in the sentence.”

The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA stylebook) says in Paragraph 3.21: “An adjective or adverb, whether a single word or phrase, must clearly refer to the word it modifies.”

Dangling modifiers have no referent or antecedent (word to modify) in a sentence. Such modifiers come in many forms and often involve misplaced participial and prepositional phrases or out-of-place dependent clauses. Here are some examples:

• The president hiked to a retreating glacier, counting on Alaska’s deteriorating landscape to illicit a sense of urgency.

In this syntax the participle “counting” modifies “glacier.” The sentence says the glacier was counting on the deteriorating landscape. The participle is supposed to modify “president.” Therefore the participial phrase should come before or after that noun: Counting on Alaska’s deteriorating landscape to illicit a sense of urgency, the president hiked to the retreating glacier.

(Note: A participle is a verb ending in “ing” that functions as an adjective.)

•  Growing up in Texas, my family always went to church each Sunday.

The participial phrase that begins with “growing” modifies “my family,” but the family didn’t grow up in Texas. The speaker/writer did, and he/she doesn’t have a referent in the sentence. Therefore the sentence needs to be rewritten: “When I was growing up in Texas, my family went to church each Sunday.”

•  Having interviewed the mayor, it is important to report the details accurately.

The participial phrase that begins with “having” modifies the pronoun “it,” but “it” has no antecedent (no referent). “It” is an expletive, a grammatical element that fills a space in a sentence (often the subject position) but carries no meaning. The participial phrase needs something to modify: “Having interviewed the mayor, I had an obligation to report details accurately.”

•  Norfolk Southern announced in January it would close its office in downtown Roanoke, moving those jobs to either Norfolk or Atlanta.

In this sentence the “moving” participial phrase is modifying “Roanoke.” But “moving” isn’t really a modifier. The word represents a second action in the sentence and should be a second verb in the predicate, not a participle: “would close its offices … and move those jobs ….”

•  The publication, which focuses on health and wellness, aggregates a number of ranking sources to create a list of the top 50 fittest colleges in the country, including U.S. News & World Report, The Princeton Review and Niche Colleges.

The participle “including” in this construction modifies “country.” The participial phrase should modify “sources”: “The publication, which focuses on health and wellness, aggregates a number of ranking sources, including U.S. News & World Report, The Princeton Review and Niche Colleges, to create a list of the top fittest colleges in the country.”

Note: This 38-word sentence is really too long for easy comprehension. Two sentences would be easier to read: “The publication, which focuses on health and wellness, aggregates a number of ranking sources to create a list of the top fittest colleges in the country. Those sources include U.S. News & World Report, The Princeton Review and Niche Colleges.”

•  When we travel to a conference, we try to do it as inexpensively as possible, putting four students to a room.

The participle “putting” has no noun or pronoun to modify. “Possible” is an adverb. “By” should replace the comma. Then “putting” becomes a gerund (a verb ending in “ing” acting as a noun). The gerund phrase “putting four students to a room” becomes the object of the preposition “by.”

•  The teacher tested students using this procedure.

This sentence is ambiguous. The participle “using” modifies “students.” But who used the procedures? The students or the teacher?

•  As a Latino, Donald Trump is the way to lose my vote.

The “as a Latino” phrase modifies “Donald Trump.” But the phrase refers to the speaker/writer. Therefore, the sentence should say: “As a Latino, I can tell you that Donald Trump is the way to lose my vote.”

•  To be an effective supervisor, a thorough understanding of all employee duties is required.

The “to be” infinitive phrase is modifying “understanding,” the subject of the passive-voice sentence. But a thorough understanding can’t be an effective supervisor. The sentence should say: “To be effective, a supervisor needs a thorough understanding of all employee duties.”

•  Unbeaten so far this season, the victory was the team’s seventh in a row.

The “unbeaten” clause modifies “victory.” The clause should refer to the team: “Unbeaten so far this season, the team has won seven straight games.”

•  Based on this assumption, we developed a new model.

This wording says “we” are based on an assumption. The model was based on the assumption: “Based on this assumption, the new model was developed.”

•  Consistent with earlier polling results, researchers Smith and Jones showed that students favored Democrats.

This wording says that “researchers Smith and Jones” were consistent with earlier polling. Clearer wording would say: Researchers Smith and Jones showed that students favored Democrats. These findings were consistent with earlier polling results.”

•  The project for retirees, launched earlier this year, has federal backing.

This wording says the retirees were propelled into the air earlier this year. The wording should be: “The project, launched earlier this year for retirees, has federal backing.”

•  “Genesis” is the Bible study topic in the Disciples Sunday school class, which will end this month.

The class is continuing. Therefore, the nonrestrictive “which” clause should modify “topic,” not “class”: “‘Genesis’ is the Bible study topic, which will end this month, in the Disciples Sunday school class.”

•  State Sen. John Edwards of Virginia’s 21^st District, who is seeking re-election, announced today that Roanoke city workers had endorsed him.

The nonrestrictive “who” clause should modify “Edwards,” not “district”: “State Sen. John Edwards, who is seeking re-election in Virginia’s 21^st District, announced today that Roanoke city workers had endorsed him.”

•  The Hokies will play in Cassell Coliseum Wednesday at 7 p.m., one of the oldest basketball venues in the conference.

The appositive phrase “one of the oldest basketball venues in the conference” should modify “Cassell Coliseum,” not “7 p.m.”: “The Hokies will play in Cassell Coliseum, one of the oldest basketball venues in the conference, at 7 p.m. Wednesday.”

•  Professor Douglas Cannon of Virginia Tech, a communication faculty member, will direct the summer writing workshop.

The appositive phrase “a communication faculty member” should modify “Cannon,” not “Tech”: “Professor Douglas Cannon, a communication faculty member at Virginia Tech, will direct the summer writing workshop.”

Note: Long, complex sentences introduce more opportunities for syntax problems than short sentences. Therefore, keeping sentences short can cut down on syntax errors and improve scores on readability scales. Sentences that try to obscure the actor with passive constructions (the ball was thrown) or indirect wording (there are … or it is important that …) often increase opportunities for syntax problems as well.

Copyright 2015, Douglas F. Cannon