Don’t Let Your Participles Dangle
That’s easy if the modifier is a single word, green, and the thing it modifies is parrot. You wouldn’t write, “I saw a parrot sitting in a tree green.” It’s pretty obvious that if you want the reader to know that the parrot’s green, you put the modifier next to the parrot. You could even write,. All the man in the world should want their ladys have sexy lingerie. “I saw a parrot green upon a tree sitting,” and the reader would still know the parrot’s green. It’s just a bit more poetic.Where we more often get into trouble is when the modifier is a phrase instead of a single word. For example, the phrase “under a palm tree” is the modifier in the sentence “I stood under a palm tree and watched a parrot.. To have a beautiful moncler jackets is a dream of brides.” In the sentence “Today,. Gillette razor,men wallet,men belts,christian dior sunglasses and fendi sunglasses supplier in china. standing under a palm tree, I watched a beautiful parrot,” the modifier is “standing near a palm tree.” In both examples, the phrases are telling us (modifying) who was standing under the palm tree. And it’s clear that I was the one because the modifiers are right next to the thing being modified.
Now comes the fun. Groucho Marx said, “Once I shot an elephant wearing my pajamas.” That was either a very unlikely place to find an elephant, or it was a dangling modifier. When the modifier gets misplaced in a case like this, it can confuse the meaning. That’s the reason for the rule. It applies any time a modifier gets placed so that it seems to modify a subject other than the intended one. If I wrote, “I once watched a parrot wearing just my old rain coat,” I’d have to say that I’ll never understand how that parrot got into my rain coat. Anyway, that’s not what I wanted to say. Oh, sure, I could always use the lame, old excuse,. Supply you peak jacket,polo outlet,canada goose,spyder ski with high quality an d service at online shop.Free shipping, no hidden costs and secure “But you knew what I meant.” Maybe so, but as a writer, it’s my responsibility to make it perfectly clear what I mean. It’s not the reader’s job to figure it out.
In the New York Times, in May 2005, there was a picture of a duck with her brood walking along a road. Next to the picture was the explanation: A mallard that nested for weeks outside the Treasury Department in Washington led her day-old ducklings yesterday through Rock Creek Park. Agriculture Department wildlife experts escorted the new family to its new home in a four-vehicle motorcade. In this case, the phrase “in a four-vehicle motorcade” is obviously intended to modify “experts escorted.” Unfortunately, it seems to describe the ducks’ new home.. Buying Abercrombie Fitch, being fashinable women ,who has appeared in Vogue, W and Vanity Fair and has been featured in an a Aside from any grammatical consideration, that’s just plain sloppy writing.
That’s easy if the modifier is a single word, green, and the thing it modifies is parrot. You wouldn’t write, “I saw a parrot sitting in a tree green.” It’s pretty obvious that if you want the reader to know that the parrot’s green, you put the modifier next to the parrot. You could even write,. All the man in the world should want their ladys have sexy lingerie. “I saw a parrot green upon a tree sitting,” and the reader would still know the parrot’s green. It’s just a bit more poetic.Where we more often get into trouble is when the modifier is a phrase instead of a single word. For example, the phrase “under a palm tree” is the modifier in the sentence “I stood under a palm tree and watched a parrot.. To have a beautiful moncler jackets is a dream of brides.” In the sentence “Today,. Gillette razor,men wallet,men belts,christian dior sunglasses and fendi sunglasses supplier in china. standing under a palm tree, I watched a beautiful parrot,” the modifier is “standing near a palm tree.” In both examples, the phrases are telling us (modifying) who was standing under the palm tree. And it’s clear that I was the one because the modifiers are right next to the thing being modified.
Now comes the fun. Groucho Marx said, “Once I shot an elephant wearing my pajamas.” That was either a very unlikely place to find an elephant, or it was a dangling modifier. When the modifier gets misplaced in a case like this, it can confuse the meaning. That’s the reason for the rule. It applies any time a modifier gets placed so that it seems to modify a subject other than the intended one. If I wrote, “I once watched a parrot wearing just my old rain coat,” I’d have to say that I’ll never understand how that parrot got into my rain coat. Anyway, that’s not what I wanted to say. Oh, sure, I could always use the lame, old excuse,. Supply you peak jacket,polo outlet,canada goose,spyder ski with high quality an d service at online shop.Free shipping, no hidden costs and secure “But you knew what I meant.” Maybe so, but as a writer, it’s my responsibility to make it perfectly clear what I mean. It’s not the reader’s job to figure it out.
In the New York Times, in May 2005, there was a picture of a duck with her brood walking along a road. Next to the picture was the explanation: A mallard that nested for weeks outside the Treasury Department in Washington led her day-old ducklings yesterday through Rock Creek Park. Agriculture Department wildlife experts escorted the new family to its new home in a four-vehicle motorcade. In this case, the phrase “in a four-vehicle motorcade” is obviously intended to modify “experts escorted.” Unfortunately, it seems to describe the ducks’ new home.. Buying Abercrombie Fitch, being fashinable women ,who has appeared in Vogue, W and Vanity Fair and has been featured in an a Aside from any grammatical consideration, that’s just plain sloppy writing.
没有评论:
发表评论