Excuse Me—Your Modifier Is Dangling

The disclaimer: I’m claiming to have heard these examples of dangling modifiers in the real world. The truth is I heard or read the dangling modifiers and the pronouns that followed, but my brain blew up with the ungrammaticality of it all and I missed the rest of the sentences. So I’ve had to make up half-sentences here.

A common error in speaking and writing is the dangling modifier. I found or heard these examples in the real world:

“After recovering from surgery, her parents started a nonprofit to raise money for cancer research.”

“As a loyal customer, we want to inform you that you will receive a credit on your bill.”

The problem in these sentences is that the initial phrase is modifying the subject, which appears right after the phrase. But it shouldn’t—that wasn’t the intent.

In the first example, the sentence states that the parents had surgery, and then started a nonprofit. What the speaker was really trying to say is that the parents’ daughter had surgery and this event led the parents to start a nonprofit organization. If the speaker really wants to keep the phrase “After recovering from surgery,” he should begin the next part with “the child,” since the child is the one who had surgery. Otherwise, he should add the child into the phrase: “After Susie had surgery, her parents…”

The second example is just the same. The company that sent out this letter is calling itself a loyal customer. What it really meant to say is, “We want to inform you, a loyal customer, that you will receive a credit.” See how the phrase moved closer to its real subject—the thing it actually describes? The company could also have gone with, “Because you are a loyal customer, we want to inform you….”

Perhaps speakers and writers often think that in order to cram some more useful information into a sentence, they can just tack it on to the beginning with a comma. But they can’t do that without changing the meaning of the sentence.

Be Careful Where You Put That Word!

Be careful with your word order; it could entirely change the meaning of what you’re saying.

Some words seem to be very easily misplaced. They slip in and out of sentences so stealthily that it’s hard to keep track of them. They are usually small, slippery words, like “all,” “not,” and “only.” Here are a couple of examples.

“Not all fats are bad” versus “All fats are not bad”

Look, there are two slippery words in there. The first sentence means that some fats are good and that you cannot lump (no pun intended) all fats into the same category. The second sentence means that all fats are good, or at least not bad.

“I only speak the truth” versus “I speak only the truth”

This first one gets me every time I listen to the Moulin Rouge soundtrack (it’s in the song “Hindi Sad Diamonds”).

The first one means “I do nothing but speak the truth,” which means that the speaker literally does nothing else. She does not eat, sleep or walk the dog. She only speaks the truth. I imagine she is some supernatural being with no physical presence but a mouth. The second means “I speak nothing but the truth. I tell no lies.”

These slippery words modify, limit or describe the words that come after them. When wondering where to put a slippery word, use a logical approach and ask yourself, “What concept (or word) does this word modify?” For instance, does “only” limit the action (“speak”) – am I only speaking and doing nothing else? Or does it limit that which is being spoken (“the truth”) – am I speaking anything else besides the truth?

And if all else fails and your head is in a jumble, start over and say it in a different way. What’s another way of saying “Not all fats” without using the word “not”? Answer: “Some fats.” Then, you can go with either “some fats are good” or “some fats are bad” and your sentence will be much clearer.