ERROR 6: DANGLING AND MISPLACED MODIFIERS
Definition
A modifier is a word, phrase, or clause that describes or gives more information about another word in the sentence. A modifier error occurs when the modifier is placed too far from the word it modifies (a misplaced modifier) or when the word the modifier is supposed to describe is entirely absent from the sentence (a dangling modifier). Both types of errors create sentences that are confusing, ambiguous, or even unintentionally humorous.
Misplaced modifiers are positioned in the sentence in a way that makes them appear to describe the wrong noun. A common type is the ‘squinting modifier,’ which is placed between two elements and could modify either one. Limiting modifiers such as ‘only,’ ‘nearly,’ ‘almost,’ ‘just,’ ‘barely,’ and ‘even’ are especially prone to being misplaced, as their position in the sentence dramatically changes the meaning.
Dangling modifiers most often appear as introductory participial phrases (-ing or -ed phrases at the start of a sentence) whose implied subject does not match the actual subject of the main clause. The rule is simple: whatever word comes immediately after an introductory phrase is understood to be the performer of that phrase’s action. If the wrong noun follows, the modifier ‘dangles.’
Rules
RULE: Place a modifier as close as possible to the word it describes.
RULE: An introductory participial phrase (Walking through the park, Exhausted from work) must be immediately followed by the noun that performs the action of that phrase.
RULE: Limiting modifiers (only, just, nearly, almost, barely, even) should be placed directly before the word they modify, as changing their position changes the meaning.
RULE: When revising a dangling modifier, either restructure the main clause so the correct noun follows the phrase, or convert the phrase into a dependent clause with an explicit subject.
Examples
✗ Walking down the street, the rain began to fall. [The rain wasn’t walking.]
✓ Walking down the street, I noticed the rain begin to fall.
✗ She only eats vegetables on Tuesdays. [Does she eat nothing else, or only on Tuesdays?]
✓ She eats vegetables only on Tuesdays. [Meaning: she limits vegetable-eating to Tuesdays.]
✗ Covered in mud, the trainer hosed down the dog. [Was the trainer covered in mud?]
✓ The trainer hosed down the dog, which was covered in mud.
✗ He nearly drove 500 miles to see her. [He almost drove but didn’t?]
✓ He drove nearly 500 miles to see her. [He drove close to 500 miles.]
✗ Exhausted after a long day, the couch seemed very inviting. [The couch wasn’t exhausted.]
✓ Exhausted after a long day, she found the couch very inviting.
✗ I saw a dog jogging through the park on my way to work. [The dog was jogging on its way to work?]
✓ On my way to work, I saw a dog jogging through the park.
✗ After reviewing your application, a decision will be sent to you shortly.
✓ After reviewing your application, we will send you a decision shortly.
✗ She served sandwiches to the children on paper plates. [Were the children on paper plates?]
✓ She served sandwiches on paper plates to the children.
✗ The professor told us frequently to review our notes. [Told us frequently, or review frequently?]
✓ The professor frequently told us to review our notes. [Or: The professor told us to review our notes frequently.]
✗ Having failed the exam twice, the professor agreed to allow a retake.
✓ Having failed the exam twice, the student convinced the professor to allow a retake.
Extended Dialogue
In this dialogue, coworkers Luis and Sophie are proofreading a company report before presenting it to management.
Luis: Sophie, listen to this sentence from our safety section: ‘Having reviewed all the accident reports, new protocols need to be implemented.’ Does that sound right to you?
Sophie: Hmm… the new protocols reviewed the accident reports?
[Note: ‘Having reviewed all the accident reports’ is an introductory participial phrase. The noun that follows it — ‘new protocols’ — must be the subject performing the reviewing. Obviously protocols cannot review reports. This is a dangling modifier.]
Luis: Exactly — the protocols didn’t do the reviewing. We did. It should say: ‘Having reviewed all the accident reports, we determined that new protocols need to be implemented.’
Sophie: Got it. What about: ‘The injured workers were treated by the nurse in the back office’? Is the nurse in the back office, or the workers?
Luis: That’s ambiguous. The phrase ‘in the back office’ is a misplaced modifier. If the nurse works in the back office: ‘The nurse in the back office treated the injured workers.’ If the workers were treated in the back office: ‘The injured workers were treated in the back office by the nurse.’
Sophie: Right — the modifier should go right next to the word it describes. What about this one: ‘He almost walked the entire five miles of the safety inspection route.’
[Note: ‘Almost’ modifies ‘walked,’ making it sound like he barely walked at all. The intended meaning is that he walked nearly five miles.]
Luis: Move ‘almost’ to right before ‘five’: ‘He walked almost five miles of the safety inspection route.’ Where you put ‘almost,’ ‘only,’ ‘just’ — those words — completely changes the meaning.
Sophie: Here’s a funny one I found: ‘The committee discussed raising safety standards in the break room.’
Luis: They’re raising safety standards specifically in the break room? Or they had a meeting in the break room?
Sophie: They held the meeting in the break room, not the safety standards!
Luis: So it should be: ‘In the break room, the committee discussed raising safety standards.’ Moving ‘in the break room’ to the front makes it clear that’s where the meeting happened.
Sophie: These modifier errors are tricky because when you write them, you know what you meant. It’s only the reader who gets confused.
Luis: That’s the problem with all writing errors — the writer’s brain fills in the gap. You have to train yourself to read as a stranger would.
About the Author
