The second type of common correction that I frequently need to make in all the texts I edit, even scholarly manuscripts, are dangling and misplaced modifiers. Problem modifiers can be embarrassing mistakes, as they can change the meaning of sentences drastically, sometimes comically.

A dangling modifier is a phrase or clause that can’t logically modify the subject of a sentence. This problem crops up particularly when authors are discussing the scope of their books or chapters. Often an expletive construction (it is, there is) begins the main clause; to fix this problem, writers should place the true subject immediately after the modifier:

• Dangling: To understand the impact of this law, it is important to review the history of women’s education. [It can’t understand.]

• To understand the impact of this law, we must first review the history of women’s education. [We can understand.]

Sometimes it’s possible to change either the main clause or the modifier to allow the sentence to make sense:

• Dangling: Before turning to Chapter 3, there are three terms to clarify ...

• Before we turn to Chapter 3, there are three terms it is important to clarify …

• Before turning to Chapter 3, we should clarify three terms …

Even without expletive constructions, dangling modifiers can make their way into sentences that describe the author’s intentions for the book as a whole:

• Dangling: Unlike other studies on this subject, you will not find us seeking to place blame for the current situation. [Unlike other studies modifies you in this sentence, which doesn’t make sense. We might expect the reader to be like or unlike other people; we wouldn’t expect them to be like or unlike other studies.]

• Unlike other studies on this subject, this book will not place blame for the current situation. [Unlike other studies clearly modifies this book.]

A misplaced modifier is one that is placed within the sentence in such a way that it is ambiguous (“squinting”) or that it modifies the wrong word. Misplaced modifiers can sound silly or actually skew the author’s intended meaning. Here’s an example of a silly-sounding modifier:

• Misplaced: Cats reward humans with dead mice. [When with dead mice appears after humans, it sounds as if the humans already possess dead mice, and for that reason the cats decide to reward them.]

Rewording the phrasing works best here:

• To reward their human owners, cats give them dead mice.

Here’s a misplaced modifier that is not silly but that alters the author’s intended meaning:

• Misplaced: The athlete almost sprinted one hundred yards before spraining his ankle. [The athlete ran at a pace just under that of a sprint.]

• The athlete sprinted almost one hundred yards before spraining his ankle. [The athlete sprinted, but the distance he ran was not quite one hundred yards.]

Here’s another misplaced adverb:

• Misplaced: From the time their children are born, parents play crucial roles in how successful their children will be cross-culturally. [The children will achieve success across several cultures.]

• From the time their children are born, parents cross-culturally play crucial roles in their how successful their children will be as adults. [Parents across several cultures all play important roles in their children’s success.]

A squinting modifier is placed so that readers are uncertain which word it is supposed to modify. The reader may not arrive at a wrong interpretation so much as be uncertain about which meaning the writer intended.

• Squinting: Writers who proofread often improve the quality of their work. [Do the writers often proofread and in that way improve their work? Do writers who proofread improve their work often? Which is happening often: the proofreading or the improving?]

Moving the adverb closer to the idea it’s meant to modify solves this problem:

• Writers who often proofread improve the quality of their work.

• Writers who proofread improve the quality of their work often.

Imagine these kinds of modifier problems in passages of text describing research methodology: if a whole argument is based on the soundness of the methods used, the author will want to be sure that modifiers aren’t introducing ambiguity or outright mistakes into descriptions of the process. Beyond methodology, scholarly writers base discussions on fine distinctions of meaning and interpretation. It’s the copy editor’s job to make sure that modifier problems don’t muddy those distinctions.

Image: stock.xchng